EXISTENTIALISM AND HUMAN EMOTIONS EXISTENTIALISM I should like on this occasion to defend existentialism against some cha ges

!hich ha"e #een # ought against it$ %i st& it has #een cha ged !ith in"iting 'eo'le to emain in a kind of des'e ate (uietism #ecause& since no solutions a e 'ossi#le& !e should ha"e to conside action in this !o ld as (uite im'ossi#le$ )e should then end u' in a 'hiloso'h* of contem'lation+ and since contem'lation is a luxu *& !e come in the end to a #ou geois 'hiloso'h*$ The communists in 'a ticula ha"e made these cha ges$ On the othe hand& !e ha"e #een cha ged !ith d!elling on human deg adation& !ith 'ointing u' e"e *!he e the so did& shad*& and slim*& and neglecting the g acious and #eautiful& the # ight side of human natu e+ fo exam'le& acco ding to Mlle$ Me cie & a ,atholic c itic& !ith fo getting the smile of the child$ -oth sides cha ge us !ith ha"ing igno ed human solida it*& !ith conside ing man as an isolated #eing$ The communists sa* that the main eason fo this is that !e take 'u e su#.ecti"it*& the ,a tesian I think& as ou sta ting 'oint+ in othe !o ds& the moment in !hich man #ecomes full* a!a e of !hat it means to him to #e an isolated #eing+ as a esult& !e a e una#le to etu n to a state of solida it* !ith the men !ho a e not ou sel"es& a state !hich !e can ne"e each in the cogito$ % om the ,h istian stand'oint& !e a e cha ged !ith den*ing the ealit* and se iousness of human unde takings& since& if !e e.ect /od0s commandments and the ete nal "e ities& the e no longe emains an*thing #ut 'u e ca' ice& !ith e"e *one 'e mitted to do as he 'leases and inca'a#le& f om his o!n 'oint of "ie!& of condemning the 'oints of "ie! and acts of othe s$ I shall t * toda* to ans!e these diffe ent cha ges$ Man* 'eo'le a e going to #e su ' ised at !hat is said he e a#out humanism$ )e shall t * to see in !hat sense it is to #e unde stood$ In an* case& !hat can #e said f om the "e * #eginning is that #* existentialism !e mean a doct ine !hich makes human life 'ossi#le and& in addition& decla es that e"e * t uth and e"e * action im'lies a human setting and a human su#.ecti"it*$ As is gene all* kno!n& the #asic cha ge against us is that !e 'ut the em'hasis on the da k side of human life$ Someone ecentl* told me of a lad* !ho& !hen she let sli' a "ulga !o d in a moment of i itation& excused he self #* sa*ing& 1I guess I0m #ecoming an existentialist$1 ,onse(uentl*& existentialism is ega ded as something ugl*+ that is !h* !e a e said to #e natu alists+ and if !e a e& it is athe su ' ising that in this da* and age !e cause so much mo e ala m and scandal than does natu alism& ' o'e l* so called$ The kind of 'e son !ho can take in his st ide such a no"el as 2ola0s The Ea th is disgusted as soon as he sta ts eading an existentialist no"el+ the kind of 'e son !ho is esigned to the !isdom of the ages33!hich is ' ett* sad33finds us e"en sadde $ 4et& !hat can #e mo e disillusioning than sa*ing 1t ue cha it* #egins at home1 o 1a scound el !ill al!a*s etu n e"il fo good15 )e kno! the common'lace ema ks made !hen this su#.ect comes u'& ema ks !hich al!a*s add u' to the same thing6 !e shouldn0t st uggle against the 'o!e s3that3#e+ !e shouldn0t esist& autho it*+ !e shouldn0t t * to ise a#o"e ou station+ an* action !hich doesn0t confo m to autho it* is omantic+ an* effo t not #ased on 'ast ex'e ience is doomed to failu e+ ex'e ience sho!s that man0s #ent is al!a*s to!a d t ou#le& that the e must #e a st ong hand to hold him in check& if not& the e !ill #e ana ch*$ The e a e still 'eo'le !ho go on mum#ling these melanchol* old sa!s& the 'eo'le !ho sa*& 1It0s onl* human71 !hene"e a mo e o less e'ugnant act is 'ointed out to them& the 'eo'le !ho glut themsel"es on chansons 8alistes+ these a e the 'eo'le !ho accuse existentialism of #eing too gloom*& and to such an extent that I !onde !hethe the* a e com'laining a#out it& not fo its 'essimism& #ut much athe its o'timism$ ,an it #e that !hat eall* sca es them in the doct ine I shall t * to ' esent he e is that it lea"es to man a 'ossi#ilit* of choice5 To ans!e this (uestion& !e must e3examine it on a st ictl* 'hiloso'hical 'lane$ )hat is meant #* the te m existentialism5 Most 'eo'le !ho use the !o d !ould #e athe em#a assed if the* had to ex'lain it& since& no! that the !o d is all the age& e"en the !o k of a musician o 'ainte is #eing called existentialist$ A gossi' columnist in ,la t8s signs himself The Existentialist& so that #* this time the !o d has #een so st etched and has taken on so # oad a meaning& that it no longe means an*thing at all$ It seems that fo !ant of an ad"ance3gua d doct ine analogous to su ealism& the kind of 'eo'le !ho a e eage fo scandal and flu * tu n to this 'hiloso'h* !hich in othe es'ects does not at all se "e thei 'u 'oses in this s'he e$ Actuall*& it is the least scandalous& the most auste e of doct ines$ It is intended st ictl* fo s'ecialists and 'hiloso'he s$ 4et it can #e defined easil*$ )hat com'licates matte s is that the e a e t!o kinds of existentialist+ fi st& those !ho a e ,h istian& among !hom I !ould include 9as'e s and /a# iel Ma cel& #oth ,atholic+ and on the othe hand the atheistic existentialists& among !hom I class Heidegge & and then the % ench existentialists and m*self$ )hat the* ha"e in common is that the* think that existence ' ecedes essence& o & if *ou ' efe & that su#.ecti"it* must #e the sta ting 'oint$ 9ust !hat does that mean5 Let us conside some o#.ect that is manufactu ed& fo exam'le& a #ook o a 'a'e 3cutte 6 he e is an o#.ect !hich has #een made #* an a tisan !hose ins'i ation came f om a conce't$ He efe ed to the conce't of !hat a 'a'e 3cutte is and like!ise to a kno!n method of ' oduction& !hich is 'a t of the conce't& something !hich is& #* and la ge& a outine$ Thus& the 'a'e 3cutte is at once an o#.ect ' oduced in a ce tain !a* and& on the othe hand& one ha"ing a s'ecific use+ and one can not 'ostulate a man !ho ' oduces a 'a'e 3cutte #ut does not kno! !hat it is used fo $ The efo e& let us sa* that& fo the 'a'e 3cutte & essence33that is& the ensem#le of #oth the ' oduction outines and the ' o'e ties !hich ena#le it to #e #oth ' oduced and defined33' ecedes existence$ Thus& the ' esence of the 'a'e 3cutte o #ook in f ont of me is dete mined$ The efo e& !e ha"e he e a technical "ie! of the !o ld !he e#* it can #e said that

' oduction ' ecedes existence$ )hen !e concei"e /od as the , eato & He is gene all* thought of as a su'e io so t of a tisan$ )hate"e doct ine !e ma* #e conside ing& !hethe one like that of Desca tes o that of Lei#nit:& !e al!a*s g ant that !ill mo e o less follo!s unde standing o & at the "e * least& accom'anies it& and that !hen /od c eates He kno!s exactl* !hat He is c eating$ Thus& the conce't of man in the mind of /od is com'a a#le to the conce't of 'a'e 3cutte in the mind of the manufactu e & and& follo!ing ce tain techni(ues and a conce'tion& /od ' oduces man& .ust as the a tisan& follo!ing a definition and a techni(ue& makes a 'a'e 3cutte $ Thus& the indi"idual man is the eali:ation of a ce tain conce't in the di"ine intelligence$ In the eighteenth centu *& the atheism of the 'hiloso'hes disca ded the idea of /od& #ut not so much fo the notion that essence ' ecedes existence$ To a ce tain extent& this idea is found e"e *!he e+ !e find it in Dide ot& in ;oltai e& and e"en in <ant$ Man has a human natu e+ this human natu e& !hich is the conce't of the human& is found in all men& !hich means that each man is a 'a ticula exam'le of a uni"e sal conce't& man$ In <ant& the esult of this uni"e salit* is that the !ild3man& the natu al man& as !ell as the #ou geois& a e ci cumsc i#ed #* the same definition and ha"e the same #asic (ualities$ Thus& he e too the essence of man ' ecedes the histo ical existence that !e find in natu e$ Atheistic existentialism& !hich I e' esent& is mo e cohe ent$ It states that if /od does not exist& the e is at least one #eing in !hom existence ' ecedes essence& a #eing !ho exists #efo e he can #e defined #* an* conce't& and that this #eing is man& o & as Heidegge sa*s& human ealit*$ )hat is meant he e #* sa*ing that existence ' ecedes essence5 It means that& fi st of all& man exists& tu ns u'& a''ea s on the scene& and& onl* afte !a ds& defines himself$ If man& as the existentialist concei"es him& is indefina#le& it is #ecause at fi st he is nothing$ Onl* afte !a d !ill he #e something& and he himself !ill ha"e made !hat he !ill #e$ Thus& the e is no human natu e& since the e is no /od to concei"e it$ Not onl* is man !hat he concei"es himself to #e& #ut he is also onl* !hat he !ills himself to #e afte this th ust to!a d existence$ Man is nothing else #ut !hat he makes of himself$ Such is the fi st ' inci'le of existentialism$ It is also !hat is called su#.ecti"it*& the name !e a e la#eled !ith !hen cha ges a e # ought against us$ -ut !hat do !e mean #* this& if not that man has a g eate dignit* than a stone o ta#le5 %o !e mean that man fi st exists& that is& that man fi st of all is the #eing !ho hu ls himself to!a d a futu e and !ho is conscious of imagining himself as #eing in the futu e$ Man is at the sta t a 'lan !hich is a!a e of itself& athe than a 'atch of moss& a 'iece of ga #age& o a cauliflo!e + nothing exists ' io to this 'lan+ the e is nothing in hea"en+ man !ill #e !hat he !ill ha"e 'lanned to #e$ Not !hat he !ill !ant to #e$ -ecause #* the !o d 1!ill1 !e gene all* mean a conscious decision& !hich is su#se(uent to !hat !e ha"e al ead* made of ou sel"es$ I ma* !ant to #elong to a 'olitical 'a t*& ! ite a #ook& get ma ied+ #ut all that is onl* a manifestation of an ea lie & mo e s'ontaneous choice that is called 1!ill$1 -ut if existence eall* does ' ecede essence& man is es'onsi#le fo !hat he is$ Thus& existentialism0s fi st mo"e is to make e"e * man a!a e of !hat he is and to make the full es'onsi#ilit* of his existence est on him$ And !hen !e sa* that a man is es'onsi#le fo himself& !e do not onl* mean that he is es'onsi#le fo his o!n indi"idualit*& #ut that he is es'onsi#le fo all men$ The !o d su#.ecti"ism has t!o meanings& and ou o''onents 'la* on the t!o$ Su#.ecti"ism means& on the one hand& that an indi"idual chooses and makes himself+ and& on the othe that it is im'ossi#le fo man to t anscend human su#.ecti"it*$ The second of these is the essential meaning of existentialism$ )hen !e sa* that man chooses his o!n self& !e mean that e"e * one of us does like!ise+ #ut !e also mean #* that that in making this choice he also chooses all men$ In fact& in c eating the man that !e !ant to #e& the e is not a single one of ou acts !hich does not at the same time c eate an image of man as !e think he ought to #e$ To choose to #e this o that is to affi m at the same time the "alue of !hat !e choose& #ecause !e can ne"e choose e"il$ )e al!a*s choose the good& and nothing can #e good fo us !ithout #eing good fo all$ If& on the othe hand& existence ' ecedes essence& and if !e g ant that !e exist and fashion ou image at one and the same time& the image is "alid fo e"e *#od* and fo ou !hole age$ Thus& ou es'onsi#ilit* is much g eate than !e might ha"e su''osed& #ecause it in"ol"es all mankind$ If I am a !o kingman and choose to .oin a ,h istian t ade3union athe than #e a communist& and if #* #eing a mem#e I !ant to sho! that the #est thing fo man is esignation& that the kingdom of man is not of this !o ld& I am not onl* in"ol"ing m* o!n case3I !ant to #e esigned fox e"e *one$ As a esult& m* action has in"ol"ed all humanit*$ To take a mo e indi"idual matte & if I !ant to ma *& to ha"e child en+ e"en if this ma iage de'ends solel* on m* o!n ci cumstances o 'assion o !ish& I am in"ol"ing all humanit* in monogam* and not me el* m*self$ The efo e& I am es'onsi#le fo m*self and fo e"e *one else$ I am c eating a ce tain image of man of m* o!n choosing$ In choosing m*self& I choose man$ This hel's us unde stand !hat the actual content is of such athe g andilo(uent !o ds as anguish& fo lo nness& des'ai $ As *ou !ill see& it0s all (uite sim'le$ %i st& !hat is meant #* anguish5 The existentialists sa* at once that man is anguish$ )hat that means is this6 the man !ho in"ol"es himself and !ho eali:es that he is not onl* the 'e son he chooses to #e& #ut also a la!make !ho is& at the same time& choosing all mankind as !ell as himself& can not hel' esca'e the feeling of his total and dee' es'onsi#ilit*$ Of cou se& the e a e man* 'eo'le !ho a e not anxious+ #ut !e claim that the* a e hiding thei anxiet*& that the* a e fleeing f om it$ ,e tainl*& man* 'eo'le #elie"e that !hen the* do something& the* themsel"es a e the onl* ones in"ol"ed& and !hen someone sa*s to them& 1)hat if e"e *one acted that !a*51 the* sh ug thei shoulde s and ans!e & 1E"e *one doesn0t act that !a*$1 -ut eall*& one should al!a*s ask himself& 1)hat !ould ha''en if e"e *#od* looked at things that !a*51 The e is no esca'ing this distu #ing thought exce't #* a kind of dou#le3dealing$ A man !ho lies and makes excuses fo himself #* sa*ing 1not e"e *#od* does that&1 is someone !ith an uneas* conscience& #ecause the act of l*ing im'lies that a uni"e sal "alue is confe ed u'on the lie$ Anguish is e"ident e"en !hen it conceals itself$ This is the anguish that <ie kegaa d called the anguish of A# aham$ 4ou

kno! the sto *6 an angel has o de ed A# aham to sac ifice his son+ if it eall* !e e an angel !ho has come and said& 14ou a e A# aham& *ou shall sac ifice *ou son&1 e"e *thing !ould #e all ight$ -ut e"e *one might fi st !onde & 1Is it eall* an angel& and am I eall* A# aham5 )hat ' oof do I ha"e51 The e !as a mad!oman !ho had hallucinations+ someone used to s'eak to he on the tele'hone and gi"e he o de s$ He docto asked he & 1)ho is it !ho talks to *ou51 She ans!e ed& 1He sa*s it0s /od$1 )hat ' oof did she eall* ha"e that it !as /od5 If an angel comes to me& !hat ' oof is the e that it0s an angel5 And if I hea "oices& !hat ' oof is the e that the* come f om hea"en and not f om hell& o f om the su#conscious& o a 'athological condition5 )hat ' o"es that the* a e add essed to me5 )hat ' oof is the e that I ha"e #een a''ointed to im'ose m* choice and m* conce'tion of man on humanit*5 I0ll ne"e find an* ' oof o sign to con"ince me of that$ If a "oice add esses me& it is al!a*s fo me to decide that this is the angel0s "oice+ if I conside that such an act is a good one& it is I !ho !ill choose to sa* that it is good athe than #ad$ No!& I0m not #eing singled out as an A# aham& and *et at e"e * moment I0m o#liged to 'e fo m exem'la * acts$ %o e"e * man& e"e *thing ha''ens as if all mankind had its e*es fixed on him and !e e guiding itself #* !hat he does$ And e"e * man ought to sa* to himself& 1Am I eall* the kind of man !ho has the ight to act in such a !a* that humanit* might guide itself #* m* actions51 And if he does not sa* that to himself& he is masking his anguish$ The e is no (uestion he e of the kind of anguish !hich !ould lead to (uietism& to inaction$ It is a matte of a sim'le so t of anguish that an*#od* !ho has had es'onsi#ilities is familia !ith$ %o exam'le& !hen a milita * office takes the es'onsi#ilit* fo an attack and sends a ce tain num#e of men to death& he chooses to do so& and in the main he alone makes the choice$ Dou#tless& o de s come f om a#o"e& #ut the* a e too # oad+ he inte ' ets them& and on this inte ' etation de'end the li"es of ten o fou teen o t!ent* men$ In making a decision he can not hel' ha"ing a ce tain anguish$ All leade s kno! this anguish$ That doesn0t kee' them f om acting+ on the cont a *& it is the "e * condition of thei action$ %o it im'lies that the* en"isage a num#e of 'ossi#ilities& and !hen the* choose one& the* eali:e that it has "alue onl* #ecause it is chosen$ )e shall see that this kind of anguish& !hich is the kind that existentialism desc i#es& is ex'lained& in addition& #* a di ect es'onsi#ilit* to the othe men !hom it in"ol"es$ It is not a cu tain se'a ating us f om action& #ut is 'a t of action itself$ )hen !e s'eak of fo lo nness& a te m Heidegge !as fond of& !e mean onl* that /od does not exist and that !e ha"e to face all the conse(uences of this$ The existentialist is st ongl* o''osed to a ce tain kind of secula ethics !hich !ould like to a#olish /od !ith the least 'ossi#le ex'ense$ A#out =>>?& some % ench teache s t ied to set u' a secula ethics !hich !ent something like this6 /od is a useless and costl* h*'othesis+ !e a e disca ding it+ #ut& mean!hile& in o de fo the e to #e an ethics& a societ*& a ci"ili:ation& it is essential that ce tain "alues #e taken se iousl* and that the* #e conside ed as ha"ing an a ' io i existence$ It must #e o#ligato *& a ' io i& to #e honest& not to lie& not to #eat *ou !ife& to ha"e child en& etc$& etc$ So !e0 e going to t * a little de"ice !hich !ill make it 'ossi#le to sho! that "alues exist all the same& insc i#ed in a hea"en of ideas& though othe !ise /od does not exist$ In othe !o ds33and this& I #elie"e& is the tendenc* of e"e *thing called efo mism in % ance33nothing !ill #e changed if /od does not exist$ )e shall find ou sel"es !ith the same no ms of honest*& ' og ess& and humanism& and !e shall ha"e made of /od an outdated h*'othesis !hich !ill 'eacefull* die off #* itse6f$ The existentialist& on the cont a *& thinks it "e * dist essing that /od does not exist& #ecause all 'ossi#ilit* of finding "alues in a hea"en of ideas disa''ea s along !ith Him+ the e can no longe #e an a ' io i /ood& since the e is no infinite and 'e fect consciousness to think it$ No!he e is it ! itten that the /ood exists& that !e must #e honest& that !e must not lie+ #ecause the fact is !e a e on a 'lane !he e the e a e onl* men$ Dostoie"sk* said& 1If /od didn0t exist& e"e *thing !ould #e 'ossi#le$1 That is the "e * sta ting 'oint of existentialism$ Indeed& e"e *thing is 'e missi#le if /od does not exist& and as a esult man is fo lo n& #ecause neithe !ithin him no !ithout does he find an*thing to cling to$ He can0t sta t making excuses fo himself$ If existence eall* does ' ecede essence& the e is no ex'laining things a!a* #* efe ence to a fixed and gi"en human natu e$ In othe !o ds& the e is no dete minism& man is f ee& man is f eedom$ On the othe hand& if /od does not exist& !e find no "alues o commands to tu n to !hich legitimi:e ou conduct$ So& in the # ight ealm of "alues& !e ha"e no excuse #ehind us& no .ustification #efo e us$ )e a e alone& !ith no excuses$ That is the idea I shall t * to con"e* !hen I sa* that man is condemned to #e f ee$ ,ondemned& #ecause he did not c eate himself& *et& in othe es'ects is f ee+ #ecause& once th o!n into the !o ld& he is es'onsi#le fo e"e *thing he does$ The existentialist does not #elie"e in the 'o!e of 'assion$ He !ill ne"e ag ee that a s!ee'ing 'assion is a a"aging to ent !hich fatall* leads a man to ce tain acts and is the efo e an excuse$ He thinks that man is es'onsi#le fo his 'assion$ The existentialist does not think that man is going to hel' himself #* finding in the !o ld some omen #* !hich to o ient himself$ -ecause he thinks that man !ill inte ' et the omen to suit himself$ The efo e& he thinks that man& !ith no su''o t and no aid& is condemned e"e * moment to in"ent man$ @onge& in a "e * fine a ticle& has said& 1Man is the futu e of man$1 That0s exactl* it$ -ut if it is taken to mean that this futu e is eco ded in hea"en& that /od sees it& then it is false& #ecause it !ould eall* no longe #e a futu e$ If it is taken to mean that& !hate"e a man ma* #e& the e is a futu e to #e fo ged& a "i gin futu e #efo e him& then this ema k is sound$ -ut then !e a e fo lo n$ To gi"e *ou an exam'le !hich !ill ena#le *ou to unde stand fo lo nness #ette & I shall cite the case of one of m* students !ho came to see me unde the follo!ing ci cumstances6 his fathe !as on #ad te ms !ith his mothe & and& mo eo"e & !as inclined to #e a colla#o ationist+ his olde # othe had #een killed in the /e man offensi"e of =AB?& and the *oung man& !ith some!hat immatu e #ut gene ous feelings& !anted to a"enge him$ His mothe li"ed alone !ith him& "e * much u'set

#* the half3t eason of he hus#and and the death of he olde son+ the #o* !as he onl* consolation$ The #o* !as faced !ith the choice of lea"ing fo England and .oining the % ee % ench %o ces33that is& lea"ing his mothe #ehind o emaining !ith his mothe and hel'ing he to ca * on$ He !as full* a!a e that the !oman li"ed onl* fo him and that his going off33and 'e ha's his death33!ould 'lunge he into des'ai $ He !as also a!a e that e"e * act that he did fo his mothe 0s sake !as a su e thing& in the sense that it !as hel'ing he to ca * on& !he eas e"e * effo t he made to!a d going off and fighting !as an unce tain mo"e !hich might un ag ound and ' o"e com'letel* useless+ fo exam'le& on his !a* to England he might& !hile 'assing th ough S'ain& #e detained indefinitel* in a S'anish cam'+ he might each England o Algie s and #e stuck in an office at a desk .o#$ As a esult& he !as faced !ith t!o "e * diffe ent kinds of action6 one& conc ete& immediate& #ut conce ning onl* one indi"idual+ the othe conce ned an incom'a a#l* "aste g ou'& a national collecti"it*& #ut fo that "e * eason !as du#ious& and might #e inte u'ted en oute$ And& at the same time& he !as !a"e ing #et!een t!o kinds of ethics$ On the one hand& an ethics of s*m'ath*& of 'e sonal de"otion+ on the othe & a # oade ethics& #ut one !hose efficac* !as mo e du#ious$ He had to choose #et!een the t!o$ )ho could hel' him choose5 ,h istian doct ine5 No$ ,h istian doct ine sa*s& 1-e cha ita#le& lo"e *ou neigh#o & take the mo e ugged 'ath& etc$& etc$1 -ut !hich is the mo e ugged 'ath5 )hom should he lo"e as a # othe 5 The fighting man o his mothe 5 )hich does the g eate good& the "ague act of fighting in a g ou'& o the conc ete one of hel'ing a 'a ticula human #eing to go on li"ing5 )ho can decide a ' io i5 No#od*$ No #ook of ethics can tell him$ The <antian ethics sa*s& 1Ne"e t eat an* 'e son as a means& #ut as an end$1 ;e * !ell& if I sta* !ith m* mothe & I0ll t eat he as an end and not as a means+ #ut #* "i tue of this "e * fact& I0m unning the isk of t eating the 'eo'le a ound me !ho a e fighting& as means+ and& con"e sel*& if I go to .oin those !ho a e fighting& I0ll #e t eating them as an end& and& #* doing that& I un the isk of t eating m* mothe as a means$ If "alues a e "ague& and if the* a e al!a*s too # oad fo the conc ete and s'ecific case that !e a e conside ing& the onl* thing left fo us is to t ust ou instincts$ That0s !hat this *oung man t ied to do+ and !hen I sa! him& he said& 1In the end& feeling is !hat counts$ I ought to choose !hiche"e 'ushes me in one di ection$ If I feel that I lo"e m* mothe enough to sac ifice e"e *thing else fo he 33m* desi e fo "engeance& fo action& fo ad"entu e33then I0ll sta* !ith he $ If& on the cont a *& I feel that m* lo"e fo m* mothe isn0t enough& I0ll lea"e$1 -ut ho! is the "alue of a feeling detc mined5 )hat gi"es his feeling fo his mothe "alue5 @ ecisel* the fact that he emained !ith he $ I ma* sa* that I like so3and3so !ell enough to sac ifice a ce tain amount of mone* fo him& #ut I ma* sa* so onl* if I0"e done it$ I ma* sa* 1I lo"e m* mothe !ell enough to emain !ith he 1 if I ha"e emained !ith he $ The onl* !a* to dete mine the "alue of this affection is& ' ecisel*& to 'e fo m an act !hich confi ms and defines it$ -ut& since I e(ui e this affection to .ustif* m* act& I find m*self caught in a "icious ci cle$ On the othe hand& /ide has !ell said that a mock feeling and a t ue feeling a e almost indistinguisha#le+ to decide that I lo"e m* mothe and !ill emain !ith he & o to emain !ith he #* 'utting on an act& amount some!hat to the same thing6 In othe !o ds& the feeling is fo med #* the acts one 'e fo ms+ so& I can not efe to it in o de to act u'on it$ )hich means that I can neithe seek !ithin m*self the t ue condition !hich !ill im'el me to act& no a''l* to a s*stem of ethics fo conce'ts !hich !ill 'e mit me to act$ 4ou !ill sa*& 1At least& he did go to a teache fo ad"ice$1 -ut if *ou seek ad"ice f om a ' iest& fo exam'le& *ou ha"e chosen this ' iest+ *ou al ead* kne!& mo e o less& .ust a#out !hat ad"ice he !as going to gi"e *ou$ In othe !o ds& choosing *ou ad"ise is in"ol"ing *ou self$ The ' oof of this is that if *ou a e a ,h istian& *ou !ill sa*& 1,onsult a ' iest$1 -ut some ' iests a e colla#o ating& some a e .ust ma king time& some a e esisting$ )hich to choose5 If the *oung man chooses a ' iest !ho is esisting o colla#o ating& he has al ead* decided on the kind of ad"ice he0s going to get$ The efo e& in coming to see me he kne! the ans!e I !as going to gi"e him& and I had onl* one ans!e to gi"e6 14ou0 e f ee& choose& that is& in"ent$1 No gene al ethics can sho! *ou !hat is to #e done+ the e a e no omens in the !o ld$ The ,atholics !ill e'l*& 11-ut the e a e$1 / anted33#ut& in an* case& I m*self choose the meaning the* ha"e$ )hen I !as a ' isone & I kne! a athe ema ka#le *oung man !ho !as a 9esuit$ He had ente ed the 9esuit o de in the follo!ing !a*6 he had had a num#e of "e * #ad # eaks+ in childhood& his fathe died& lea"ing him in 'o"e t*& and he !as a schola shi' student at a eligious institution !he e he !as constantl* made to feel that he !as #eing ke't out of cha it*+ then& he failed to get an* of the hono s and distinctions that child en like+ late on& at a#out eighteen& he #ungled a lo"e affai + finall*& at t!ent*3t!o& he failed in milita * t aining& a childish enough matte & #ut it !as the last st a!$ This *oung fello! might !ell ha"e felt that he had #otched e"e *thing$ It !as a sign of something& #ut of !hat5 He might ha"e taken efuge in #itte ness o des'ai $ -ut he "e * !isel* looked u'on all this as a sign that he !as not made fo secula t ium'hs& and that onl* the t ium'hs of eligion& holiness& and faith !e e o'en to him$ He sa! the hand of /od in all this& and so he ente ed the o de $ )ho can hel' seeing that he alone decided !hat the sign meant5 Some othe inte ' etation might ha"e #een d a!n f om this se ies of set#acks+ fo exam'le& that he might ha"e done #ette to tu n ca 'ente o e"olutionist$ The efo e& he is full* es'onsi#le fo the inte ' etation$ %o lo nness im'lies that !e ou sel"es choose ou #eing$ %o lo nness and anguish go togethe $ As fo des'ai & the te m has a "e * sim'le meaning$ It means that !e shall confine ou sel"es to eckoning onl* !ith !hat de'ends u'on ou !ill& o on the ensem#le of ' o#a#ilities !hich make ou action 'ossi#le$ )hen !e !ant something& !e al!a*s ha"e to eckon !ith ' o#a#ilities$ I ma* #e counting on the a i"al of a f iend$ The f iend is coming #* ail o st eet3ca + this su''oses that the t ain !ill a i"e on schedule& o that the st eet3ca !ill not .um' the t ack$ I am left in the ealm of 'ossi#ilit*+ #ut 'ossi#ilities a e to #e eckoned !ith onl* to the 'oint !he e m* action com'o ts !ith the ensem#le of these 'ossi#ilities& and no fu the $ The moment the 'ossi#ilities I am conside ing a e not igo ousl* in"ol"ed #* m*

action& I ought to disengage m*self f om them& #ecause no /od& no scheme& can ada't the !o ld and its 'ossi#ilities to m* !ill$ )hen Desca tes said& 1,on(ue *ou self athe than the !o ld&1 he meant essentiall* the same thing$ The Ma xists to !hom I ha"e s'oken e'l*& 14ou can el* on the su''o t of othe s in *ou action& !hich o#"iousl* has ce tain limits #ecause *ou0 e not going to li"e fo e"e $ That means6 el* on #oth !hat othe s a e doing else!he e to hel' *ou& in ,hina& in Cussia& and !hat the* !ill do late on& afte *ou death& to ca * on the action and lead it to its fulfillment& !hich !ill #e the e"olution$ 4ou e"en ha"e to el* u'on that& othe !ise *ou0 e immo al$1 I e'l* at once that I !ill al!a*s el* on fello!3fighte s insofa as these com ades a e in"ol"ed !ith me in a common st uggle& in the unit* of a 'a t* o a g ou' in !hich I can mo e o less make m* !eight felt+ that is& one !hose anks I am in as a fighte and !hose mo"ements I am a!a e of at e"e * moment$ In such a situation& el*ing on the unit* and !ill of the 'a t* is exactl* like counting on the fact that the t ain !ill a i"e on time o that the ca !on0t .um' the t ack$ -ut& gi"en that man is f ee and that the e is no human natu e fo me to de'end on& I can not count on men !hom I do not kno! #* el*ing on human goodness o man0s conce n fo the good of societ*$ I don0t kno! !hat !ill #ecome of the Cussian e"olution+ I ma* make an exam'le of it to the extent that at the ' esent time it is a''a ent that the ' oleta iat 'la*s a 'a t in Cussia that it 'la*s in no othe nation$ -ut I can0t s!ea that this !ill ine"ita#l* lead to a t ium'h of the ' oleta iat$ I0"e got to limit m*self to !hat I see$ /i"en that men a e f ee and that tomo o! the* !ill f eel* decide !hat man !ill #e& I can not #e su e that& afte m* death& fello!3fighte s !ill ca * on m* !o k to # ing it to its maximum 'e fection$ Tomo o!& afte m* death& some men ma* decide to set u' %ascism& and the othe s ma* #e co!a dl* and muddled enough to let them do it$ %ascism !ill then #e the human ealit*& so much the !o se fo us$ Actuall*& things !ill #e as man !ill ha"e decided the* a e to #e$ Does that mean that I should a#andon m*self to (uietism5 No$ %i st& I should in"ol"e m*self+ then& act on the old sa!& 1Nothing "entu ed& nothing gained$1 No does it mean that I shouldn0t #elong to a 'a t*& #ut athe that I shall ha"e no illusions and shall do !hat I can$ %o exam'le& su''ose I ask m*self& 1)ill sociali:ation& as such& e"e come a#out51 I kno! nothing a#out it$ All I kno! is that I0m going to do e"e *thing in m* 'o!e to # ing it a#out$ -e*ond that& I can0t count on an*thing$ Duietism is the attitude of 'eo'le !ho sa*& 1Let othe s do !hat I can0t do$1 The doct ine I am ' esenting is the "e * o''osite of (uietism& since it decla es& 1The e is no ealit* exce't in action$1 Mo eo"e & it goes fu the & since it adds& 1Man is nothing else than his 'lan+ he exists onl* to the extent that he fulfills himself+ he is the efo e nothing else than the ensem#le of his acts& nothing else than his life$1 Acco ding to this& !e can unde stand !h* ou doct ine ho ifies ce tain 'eo'le$ -ecause often the onl* !a* the* can #ea thei ! etchedness is to think& 1,i cumstances ha"e #een against me$ )hat I0"e #een and done doesn0t sho! m* t ue !o th$ To #e su e& I0"e had no g eat lo"e& no g eat f iendshi'& #ut that0s #ecause I ha"en0t met a man o !oman !ho !as !o th*$ The #ooks I0"e ! itten ha"en0t #een "e * good #ecause I ha"en0t had the ' o'e leisu e$ I ha"en0t had child en to de"ote m*self to #ecause I didn0t find a man !ith !hom I could ha"e s'ent m* life$ So the e emains !ithin me& unused and (uite "ia#le& a host of ' o'ensities& inclinations& 'ossi#ilities& that one !ouldn0t guess f om the me e se ies of things I0"e done$1 No!& fo the existentialist the e is eall* no lo"e othe than one !hich manifests itself in a 'e son0s #eing in lo"e$ The e is no genius othe than one !hich is ex' essed in !o ks of a t+ the genius of @ oust is the sum of @ oust0s !o ks+ the genius of Cacine is his se ies of t agedies$ Outside of that& the e is nothing$ )h* sa* that Cacine could ha"e ! itten anothe t aged*& !hen he didn0t ! ite it5 A man is in"ol"ed in life& lea"es his im' ess on it& and outside of that the e is nothing$ To #e su e& this ma* seem a ha sh thought to someone !hose life hasn0t #een a success$ -ut& on the othe hand& it ' om'ts 'eo'le to unde stand that ealit* alone is !hat counts& that d eams& ex'ectations& and ho'es !a ant no mo e than to define a man as a disa''ointed d eam& as misca ied ho'es& as "ain ex'ectations$ In othe !o ds& to define him negati"el* and not 'ositi"el*$ Ho!e"e & !hen !e sa*& 14ou a e nothing else than *ou life&1 that does not im'l* that the a tist !ill #e .udged solel* on the #asis of his !o ks of a t+ a thousand othe things !ill cont i#ute to!a d summing him u'$ )hat !e mean is that a man is nothing else than a se ies of unde takings& that he is the sum& the o gani:ation& the ensem#le of the elationshi's !hich make u' these unde takings$ )hen all is said and done& !hat !e a e accused of& at #ottom& is not ou 'essimism& #ut an o'timistic toughness$ If 'eo'le th o! u' to us ou !o ks of fiction in !hich !e ! ite a#out 'eo'le !ho a e soft& !eak& co!a dl*& and sometimes e"en do!n ight #ad& it0s not #e$ cause these 'eo'le a e soft& !eak& co!a dl*& o #ad+ #ecause if !e !e e to sa*& as 2ola did& that the* a e that !a* #ecause of he edit*& the !o kings of en"i onment& societ*& #ecause of #iological o 's*chological dete minism& 'eo'le !ould #e eassu ed$ The* !ould sa*& 1)ell& that0s !hat !e0 e like& no one can do an*thing a#out it$1 -ut !hen the existentialist ! ites a#out a co!a d& he sa*s that this co!a d is es'onsi#le fo his co!a dice$ He0s not like that #ecause he has a co!a dl* hea t o lung o # ain+ he0s not like that on account of his 'h*siological make3u'+ #ut he0s like that #ecause he has made himself a co!a d #* his acts$ The e0s no such thing as a co!a dl* constitution+ the e a e ne "ous constitutions+ the e is 'oo #lood& as the common 'eo'le sa*& o st ong constitutions$ -ut the man !hose #lood is 'oo is not a co!a d on that account& fo !hat makes co!a dice is the act of enouncing o *ielding$ A constitution is not an act+ the co!a d is defined on the #asis of the acts he 'e fo ms$ @eo'le feel& in a "ague so t of !a*& that this co!a d !e0 e talking a#out is guilt* of #eing a co!a d& and the thought f ightens them$ )hat 'eo'le !ould like is that a co!a d o a he o #e #o n that !a*$ One of the com'laints most f e(uentl* made a#out The )a*s of % eedomE can #e summed u' as follo!s6 1Afte all& these 'eo'le a e so s'ineless& ho! a e *ou going to make he oes out of them51 This o#.ection almost makes me laugh& fo it assumes that 'eo'le a e #o n he oes$ That0s !hat 'eo'le eall* !ant to think$ If *ou0 e #o n co!a dl*& *ou ma* set *ou

mind 'e fectl* at est+ the e0s nothing *ou can do a#out it+ *ou0ll #e co!a dl* all *ou life& !hate"e *ou ma* do$ If *ou0 e #o n a he o& *ou ma* set *ou mind .ust as much at est+ *ou0ll #e a he o all *ou life+ *ou0ll d ink like a he o and eat like a he o$ )hat the existentialist sa*s is that the co!a d makes himself co!a dl*& that the he o makes himself he oic$ The e0s al!a*s a 'ossi#ilit* fo the co!a d not to #e co!a dl* an* mo e and fo the he o to sto' #eing he oic$ )hat counts is total in"ol"ement+ some one 'a ticula action o set of ci cumstances is not total in"ol"ement$ ELes ,hemins de =a Li#e t8& M$ Sa t e0s ' o.ected t ilog* of no"els& t!o of !hich& L0Age de Caison FThe Age of CeasonG and Le Su sis FThe Ce' ie"eG ha"e al ead* a''ea ed$33T anslato 0s note$Thus& I think !e ha"e ans!e ed a num#e of the cha ges conce ning existentialism$ 4ou see that it can not #e taken fo a 'hiloso'h* of (uietism& since it defines man in te ms of action+ no fo a 'essimistic desc i'tion of man33the e is no doct ine mo e o'timistic& since man0s destin* is !ithin himself+ no fo an attem't to discou age man f om acting& since it tells him that the onl* ho'e is in his acting and that action is the onl* thing that ena#les a man to li"e$ ,onse(uentl*& !e a e dealing he e !ith an ethics of action and in"ol"ement$ Ne"e theless& on the #asis of a fe! notions like these& !e a e still cha ged !ith immu ing man in his ' i"ate su#.ecti"it*$ The e again !e0 e "e * much misunde stood$ Su#.ecti"it* of the indi"idual is indeed ou 'oint of de'a tu e& and this fo st ictl* 'hiloso'hic easons$ Not #ecause !e a e #ou geois& #ut #ecause !e !ant a doct ine #ased on t uth and not a lot of fine theo ies& full of ho'e #ut !ith no eal #asis$ The e can #e no othe t uth to take off f om than this6 I think+ the efo e& I exist$ The e !e ha"e the a#solute t uth of consciousness #ecoming a!a e of itself$ E"e * theo * !hich takes man out of the moment in !hich he #ecomes a!a e of himself is& at its "e * #eginning& a theo * !hich confounds t uth& fo outside the ,a tesian cogito& all "ie!s a e onl* ' o#a#le& and a doct ine of ' o#a#ilit* !hich is not #ound to a t uth dissol"es into thin ai $ In o de to desc i#e the ' o#a#le& *ou must ha"e a fi m hold on the t ue$ The efo e& #efo e the e can #e an* t uth !hatsoe"e & the e must #e an a#solute t uth+ and this one is sim'le and easil* a i"ed at+ it0s on e"e *one0s doo ste'+ it0s a matte of g as'ing it di ectl*$ Secondl*& this theo * is the onl* one !hich gi"es man dignit*& the onl* one !hich does not educe him to an o#.ect$ The effect of all mate ialism is to t eat all men& including the one 'hiloso'hi:ing& as o#.ects& that is& as an ensem#le of dete mined eactions in no !a* distinguished f om the ensem#le of (ualities and 'henomena !hich constitute a ta#le o a chai o a stone$ )e definitel* !ish to esta#lish the human ealm as an ensem#le of "alues distinct f om the mate ial ealm$ -ut the su#.ecti"it* that !e ha"e thus a i"ed at& and !hich !e ha"e claimed to #e t uth& is not a st ictl* indi"idual su#.ecti"it*& fo !e ha"e demonst ated that one disco"e s in the cogito not onl* himself& #ut othe s as !ell$ The 'hiloso'hies of Desca tes and <ant to the cont a *& th ough the I think !e each ou o!n self in the ' esence of othe s& and the othe s a e .ust as eal to us as ou o!n self$ Thus& the man !ho #ecomes a!a e of himself th ough the cogito also 'e cei"es all othe s& and he 'e cei"es them as the condition of his o!n existence$ He eali:es that he can not #e an*thing Fin the sense that !e sa* that someone is !itt* o nast* o .ealousG unless othe s ecogni:e it as such$ In o de to get an* t uth a#out m*self& I must ha"e contact !ith anothe 'e son$ The othe is indis'ensa#le to m* o!n existence& as !ell as to m* kno!ledge a#out m*self$ This #eing so& in disco"e ing m* inne #eing I disco"e the othe 'e son at the same time& like a f eedom 'laced in f ont of me !hich thinks and !ills onl* fo o against me$ Hence& let us at once announce the disco"e * of a !o ld !hich !e shall call inte su#.ecti"it*+ this is the !o ld in !hich man decides !hat he is and !hat othe s a e$ -esides& if it is im'ossi#le to find in e"e * man some uni"e sal essence !hich !ould #e human natu e& *et the e does exist a uni"e sal human condition$ It0s not #* chance that toda*0s thinke s s'eak mo e eadil* of man0s condition than of his natu e$ -* condition the* mean& mo e o less definitel*& the a ' io i limits !hich outline man0s fundamental situation in the uni"e se$ Histo ical situations "a *+ a man ma* #e #o n a sla"e in a 'agan societ* o a feudal lo d o a ' oleta ian$ )hat does not "a * is the necessit* fo him to exist in the !o ld& to #e at !o k the e& to #e the e in the midst of othe 'eo'le& and to #e mo tal the e$ The limits a e neithe su#.ecti"e no o#.ecti"e& o & athe & the* ha"e an o#.ecti"e and a su#.ecti"e side$ O#.ecti"e #ecause the* a e to #e found e"e *!he e and a e ecogni:a#le e"e *!he e+ su#.ecti"e #ecause the* a e li"ed and a e nothing if man does not li"e them& that is& f eel* dete mine his existence !ith efe ence to them$ And though the configu ations ma* diffe & at least none of them a e com'letel* st ange to me& #ecause the* all a''ea as attem'ts eithe to 'ass #e*ond these limits o ecede f om them o den* them o ada't to them$ ,onse(uentl*& e"e * configu ation& ho!e"e indi"idual it ma* #e& has a uni"e sal "alue$ E"e * configu ation& e"en the ,hinese& the Indian& o the Neg o& can #e unde stood #* a )este ne $ 1,an #e unde stood1 means that #* "i tue of a situation that he can imagine& a Eu o'ean of =ABH can& in like manne & 'ush himself to his limits and econstitute !ithin himself the configu ation of the ,hinese& the Indian& o the Af ican$ E"e * configu ation has uni"e salit* in the sense that e"e * configu ation can #e unde stood #* e"e * man$ This does not at all mean that this configu ation defines man fo e"e & #ut that it can #e met !ith again$ The e is al!a*s a !a* to unde stand the idiot& the child& the sa"age& the fo eigne & ' o"ided one has the necessa * info mation$ In this sense !e ma* sa* that the e is a uni"e salit* of man+ #ut it is not gi"en& it is 'e 'etuall* #eing made$ I #uild the uni"e sal in choosing m*self+ I #uild it in unde standing the configu ation of e"e * othe man& !hate"e age he might ha"e li"ed in$ This a#soluteness of choice does not do a!a* !ith the elati"eness of each e'och$ At hea t& !hat existentialism sho!s is the connection #et!een the a#solute cha acte of f ee in"ol"ement& #* "i tue of !hich e"e * man eali:es himself in eali:ing a t*'e of mankind& an in"ol"ement al!a*s com' ehensi#le in an* age !hatsoe"e and #* an* 'e son !hosoe"e & and the elati"eness of the cultu al ensem#le !hich ma* esult f om such a choice+ it must #e st essed that the elati"it* of ,a tesianism and the a#solute cha acte of ,a tesian in"ol"ement go togethe $ In this sense& *ou ma*& if *ou

like& sa* that each of us 'e fo ms an a#solute act in # eathing& eating& slee'ing& o #eha"ing in an* !a* !hate"e $ The e is no diffe ence #et!een #eing f ee$ like a configu ation& like an existence !hich chooses its essence& and #eing a#solute$ The e is no diffe ence #et!een #eing an a#solute tem'o a il* locali:ed& that is& locali:ed in histo *& and #eing uni"e sall* com' ehensi#le$ This does not enti el* settle the o#.ection to su#.ecti"ism$ In fact& the o#.ection still takes se"e al fo ms$ %i st& the e is the follo!ing6 !e a e told& 1So *ou0 e a#le to do an*thing& no matte !hat71 This is ex' essed in "a ious !a*s$ %i st !e a e accused of ana ch*+ then the* sa*& 14ou0 e una#le to 'ass .udgment on othe s& #ecause the e0s no eason to ' efe one configu ation to anothe 1+ finall* the* tell us& 1E"e *thing is a #it a * in this choosing of *ou s$ 4ou take something f om one 'ocket and ' etend *ou0 e 'utting it into the othe $1 These th ee o#.ections a en0t "e * se ious$ Take the fi st o#.ection$ 14ou0 e a#le to do an*thing& no matte !hat1 is not to the 'oint$ In one sense choice is 'ossi#le& #ut !hat is not 'ossi#le is not to choose$ I can al!a*s choose& #ut I ought to kno! that if I do not choose& I am still choosing$ Though this ma* seem 'u el* fo mal& it is highl* im'o tant fo kee'ing fantas* and ca' ice !ithin #ounds$ If it is t ue that in facing a situation& fo exam'le& one in !hich& as a 'e son ca'a#le of ha"ing sexual elations& of ha"ing child en& I am o#liged to choose an attitude& and if I in an* !a* assume es'onsi#ilit* fo a choice !hich& in in"ol"ing m*self& also in"ol"es all mankind& this has nothing to do !ith ca' ice& e"en if no a ' io i "alue dete mines m* choice$ If an*#od* thinks that he ecogni:es he e /ide0s theo * of the a #it a * act& he fails to see the eno mous diffe ence #et!een this doct ine and /ide0s$ /ide does not kno! !hat a situation is$ He acts out of 'u e ca' ice$ %o us& on the cont a *& man is in an o gani:ed situation in !hich he himself is in"ol"ed$ Th ough his choice& he in"ol"es all mankind& and he can not a"oid making a choice6 eithe he !ill emain chaste& o he !ill ma * !ithout ha"ing child en& o he !ill ma * and ha"e child en+ an*ho!& !hate"e he ma* do& it is im'ossi#le fo him not to take full es'onsi#ilit* fo the !a* he handles this ' o#lem$ Dou#tless& he chooses !ithout efe ing to ' eesta#lished "alues& #ut it is unfai to accuse him of ca' ice$ Instead& let us sa* that mo al choice is to #e com'a ed to the making of a !o k of a t$ And #efo e going an* fu the & let it #e said at once that !e a e not dealing he e !ith an aesthetic ethics& #ecause ou o''onents a e so dishonest that the* e"en accuse us of that$ The exam'le I0"e chosen is a com'a ison onl*$ Ha"ing said that& ma* I ask !hethe an*one has e"e accused an a tist !ho has 'ainted a 'ictu e of not ha"ing d a!n his ins'i ation f om ules set u' a ' io i5 Has an*one e"e asked& 1)hat 'ainting ought he to make51 It is clea l* unde stood that the e is no definite 'ainting to #e made& that the a tist is engaged in the making of his 'ainting& and that the 'ainting to #e made is ' ecisel* the 'ainting he !ill ha"e made$ It is clea l* unde stood that the e a e no a ' io i aesthetic "alues& #ut that the e a e "alues !hich a''ea su#se(uentl* in the cohe ence of the 'ainting& in the co es'ondence #et!een !hat the a tist intended and the esult$ No#od* can tell !hat the 'ainting of tomo o! !ill #e like$ @ainting can #e .udged onl* afte it has once #een made$ )hat connection does that ha"e !ith ethics5 )e a e in the same c eati"e situation$ )e ne"e sa* that a !o k of a t is a #it a *$ )hen !e s'eak of a can"as of @icasso& !e ne"e sa* that it is a #it a *+ !e unde stand (uite !ell that he !as making himself !hat he is at the "e * time he !as 'ainting& that the ensem#le of his !o k is em#odied in his life$ The same holds on the ethical 'lane$ )hat a t and ethics ha"e in common is that !e ha"e c eation and in"ention in #oth cases$ )e can not decide a ' io i !hat the e is to #e done$ I think that I 'ointed that out (uite sufficientl* !hen I mentioned the case of the student !ho came to see me& and !ho might ha"e a''lied to all the ethical s*stems& <antian o othe !ise& !ithout getting an* so t of guidance$ He !as o#liged to de"ise his la! himself$ Ne"e let it #e said #* us that this man33!ho& taking affection& indi"idual action& and kind3hea tedness to!a d a s'ecific 'e son as his ethical fi st ' inci'le& chooses to emain !ith his mothe & o !ho& ' efe ing to make a sac ifice& chooses to go to England33has made an a #it a * choice$ Man makes himself$ He isn0t ead* made at the sta t$ In choosing his ethics& he makes himself& and fo ce of ci cumstances is such that he can not a#stain f om choosing one$ )e define man onl* in elationshi' to in"ol"ement$ It is the efo e a#su d to cha ge us !ith a #it a iness of choice$ In the second 'lace& it is said that !e a e una#le to 'ass .udgment on othe s$ In a !a* this is t ue& and in anothe !a*& false$ It is t ue in this sense& that& !hene"e a man sanel* and since el* in"ol"es himself and chooses his configu ation& it is im'ossi#le fo him to ' efe anothe configu ation& ega dless of !hat his o!n ma* #e in othe es'ects$ It is t ue in this sense& that !e do not #elie"e in ' og ess$ @ og ess is #ette ment$ Man is al!a*s the same$ The situation conf onting him "a ies$ ,hoice al!a*s emains a choice in a situation$ The ' o#lem has not changed since the time one could choose #et!een those fo and those against sla"e *& fo exam'le& at the time of the ,i"il )a & and the ' esent time& !hen one can side !ith the Ma(uis Cesistance @a t*& o !ith the ,ommunists$ -ut& ne"e theless& one can still 'ass .udgment& fo & as I ha"e said& one makes a choice in elationshi' to othe s$ %i st& one can .udge Fand this is 'e ha's not a .udgment of "alue& #ut a logical .udgmentG that ce tain choices a e #ased on e o and othe s on t uth$ If !e ha"e defined man0s situation as a f ee choice& !ith no excuses and no ecou se& e"e * man !ho takes efuge #ehind the excuse of his 'assions& e"e * man !ho sets u' a dete minism& is a dishonest man$ The o#.ection ma* #e aised& 1-ut !h* ma*n0t he choose himself dishonestl*51 I e'l* that I am not o#liged to 'ass mo al .udgment on him& #ut that I do define his dishonest* as an e o $ One can not hel' conside ing the t uth of the matte $ Dishonest* is o#"iousl* a falsehood #ecause it #elies the com'lete f eedom of in"ol"ement$ On the same g ounds& I maintain that the e is also dishonest* if I choose to state that ce tain "alues exist ' io to me+ it is self3cont adicto * fo me to !ant them and at the same state that the* a e im'osed on me$ Su''ose someone sa*s to me& 1)hat if I !ant to #e dishonest51 I0ll ans!e & 1The e0s no eason fo *ou not to #e& #ut I0m sa*ing that that0s !hat *ou a e& and that the st ictl*

cohe ent attitude is that of honest*$1 -esides& I can # ing mo al .udgment to #ea $ )hen I decla e that f eedom in e"e * conc ete ci cumstance can ha"e no othe aim than to !ant itself& if man has once #ecome a!a e that in his fo lo nness he im'oses "alues& he can no longe !ant #ut one thing& and that is f eedom& as the #asis of all "alues$ That doesn0t mean that he !ants it in the a#st act$ It means sim'l* that the ultimate meaning of the acts of honest men is the (uest fo f eedom as such$ A man !ho #elongs to a communist o e"olutiona * union !ants conc ete goals+ these goals im'l* an a#st act desi e fo f eedom+ #ut this f eedom is !anted in something conc ete$ )e !ant f eedom fo f eedom0s sake and in e"e * 'a ticula ci cumstance$ And in !anting f eedom !e disco"e that it de'ends enti el* on the f eedom of othe s& and that the f eedom of othe s de'ends on ou s$ Of cou se& f eedom as the definition of man does not de'end on othe s& #ut as soon as the e is in"ol"ement& I am o#liged to !ant othe s to ha"e f eedom at the same time that I !ant m* o!n f eedom$ I can take f eedom as m* goal onl* if I take that of othe s as a goal as !ell$ ,onse(uentl*& !hen& in all honest*& I0"e ecogni:ed that man is a #eing in !hom existence ' ecedes essence& that he is a f ee #eing !ho& in "a ious ci cumstances& can !ant onl* his f eedom& I ha"e at the same time ecogni:ed that I can !ant onl* the f eedom of othe s$ The efo e& in the name of this !ill fo f eedom& !hich f eedom itself im'lies& I ma* 'ass .udgment on those !ho seek to hide f om themsel"es the com'lete a #it a iness and the com'lete f eedom of thei existence$ Those !ho hide thei com'lete f eedom f om themsel"es out of a s'i it of se iousness o #* means of dete ministic excuses& I shall call co!a ds+ those !ho t * to sho! that thei existence !as necessa *& !hen it is the "e * contingenc* of man0s a''ea ance on ea th& I shall call stinke s$ -ut co!a ds o stinke s can #e .udged onl* f om a st ictl* un#iased 'oint of "ie!$ The efo e though the content of ethics is "a ia#le& a ce tain fo m of it is uni"e sal$ <ant sa*s that f eedom desi es #oth itself and the f eedom of othe s$ / anted$ -ut he #elie"es that the fo mal and the uni"e sal a e enough to constitute an ethics$ )e& on the othe hand& think that ' inci'les !hich a e too a#st act un ag ound in t *ing to decide action$ Once again& take the case of the student$ In the name of !hat& in the name of !hat g eat mo al maxim do *ou think he could ha"e decided& in 'e fect 'eace of mind& to a#andon his mothe o to sta* !ith he 5 The e is no !a* of .udging$ The content is al!a*s conc ete and the e#* unfo eseea#le+ the e is al!a*s the element of in"ention$ The one thing that counts is kno!ing !hethe the in"enting that has #een done& has #een done in the name of f eedom$ %o exam'le& let us look at the follo!ing t!o cases$ 4ou !ill see to !hat extent the* co es'ond& *et diffe $ Take The Mill on the %loss$ )e find a ce tain *oung gi l& Maggie Tulli"e & !ho is an em#odiment of the "alue of 'assion and !ho is a!a e of it$ She is in lo"e !ith a *oung man& Ste'hen& !ho is engaged to an insignificant *oung gi l$ This Maggie Tulli"e & instead of heedlessl* ' efe ing he o!n ha''iness& chooses& in the name of human solida it*& to sac ifice he self and gi"e u' the man she lo"es$ On the othe hand& Sanse"e ina& in The ,ha te house of @a ma& #elie"ing that 'assion is man0s t ue "alue& !ould sa* that a g eat lo"e dese "es sac ifices+ that it is to #e ' efe ed to the #analit* of the con.ugal lo"e that !ould tie Ste'hen to the *oung ninn* he had to ma *$ She !ould choose to sac ifice the gi l and fulfill he ha''iness+ and& as Stendhal sho!s& she is e"en ead* to sac ifice he self fo the sake of 'assion& if this life demands it$ He e !e a e in the ' esence of t!o st ictl* o''osed mo alities$ I claim that the* a e much the same thing+ in #oth cases !hat has #een set u' as the goal is f eedom$ 4ou can imagine t!o highl* simila attitudes6 one gi l ' efe s to enounce he lo"e out of esignation+ anothe ' efe s to dis ega d the ' io attachment of the man she lo"es out of sexual desi e$ On the su face these t!o actions esem#le those !e0"e .ust desc i#ed$ Ho!e"e & the* a e com'letel* diffe ent$ Sanse"e ina0s attitude is much nea e that of Maggie Tulli"e & one of heedless a'acit*$ Thus& *ou see that the second cha ge is t ue and& at the same time& false$ One ma* choose an*thing if it is on the g ounds of f ee in"ol"ement$ The thi d o#.ection is the follo!ing6 14ou take something f om one 'ocket and 'ut it into the othe $ That is& fundamentall*& "alues a en0t se ious& since *ou choose them$1 M* ans!e to this is that I0m (uite "exed that that0s the !a* it is+ #ut if I0"e disca ded /od the %athe & the e has to #e someone to in"ent "alues$ 4ou0"e got to take things as the* a e$ Mo eo"e & to sa* that !e in"ent "alues means nothing else #ut this6 life has no meaning a ' io i$ -efo e *ou come ali"e& life is nothing+ it0s u' to *ou to gi"e it a meaning& and "alue is nothing else #ut the meaning that *ou choose$ In that !a*& *ou see& the e is a 'ossi#ilit* of c eating a human communit*$ I0"e #een e' oached fo asking !hethe existentialism is humanistic$ It0s #een said& 1-ut *ou said in Nausea that the humanists !e e all ! ong$ 4ou made fun of a ce tain kind of humanist$ )h* come #ack to it no!51 Actuall*& the !o d humanism has t!o "e * diffe ent meanings$ -* humanism one can mean a theo * !hich takes man as an end and as a highe "alue$ Humanism in this sense can #e found in ,octeau0s tale A ound the )o ld in Eight* Hou s !hen a cha acte & #ecause he is fl*ing o"e some mountains in an ai 'lane& decla es& 1Man is sim'l* ama:ing$1 That means that I& !ho did not #uild the ai 'lanes& shall 'e sonall* #enefit f om these 'a ticula in"entions& and that I& as man& shall 'e sonall* conside m*self es'onsi#le fo & and hono ed #*& acts of a fe! 'a ticula men$ This !ould im'l* that !e asc i#e a "alue to man on the #asis of the highest deeds of ce tain men$ This humanism is a#su d& #ecause onl* the dog o the ho se !ould #e a#le to make such an o"e 3all .udgment a#out man& !hich the* a e ca eful not to do& at least to m* kno!ledge$ -ut it can not #e g anted that a man ma* make a .udgment a#out man$ Existentialism s'a es him f om an* such .udgment$ The existentialist !ill ne"e conside man as an end #ecause he is al!a*s in the making$ No should !e #elie"e that the e is a mankind to !hich !e might set u' a cult in the manne of Auguste ,omte$ The cult of mankind ends in the self3 enclosed humanism of ,omte& and& let it #e said& of fascism$ This kind of humanism !e can do !ithout$ -ut the e is anothe meaning of humanism$ %undamentall* it is this6 man is constantl* outside of himself+ in ' o.ecting

himself& in losing himself outside of himself& he makes fo man0s existing+ and& on the othe hand& it is #* 'u suing t anscendent goals that he is a#le to exist+ man& #eing this state of 'assing3#e*ond& and sei:ing u'on things onl* as the* #ea u'on this 'assing3#e*ond& is at the hea t& at the cente of this 'assing3#e*ond$ The e is no uni"e se othe than a human uni"e se& the uni"e se of human su#.ecti"it*$ This connection #et!een t anscendenc*& as a constituent element of man33not in the sense that /od is t anscendent& #ut in the sense of 'assing #e*ond33and su#.ecti"it*& in the sense that man is not closed in on himself #ut is al!a*s ' esent in a human uni"e se& is !hat !e call existentialism humanism$ Humanism& #ecause !e emind man that the e is no la!3make othe than himself& and that in his fo lo nness he !ill decide #* himself+ #ecause !e 'oint out that man !ill fulfill himself as man& not in tu ning to!a d himself& #ut in seeking outside of himself a goal !hich is .ust this li#e ation& .ust this 'a ticula fulfillment$ I% om these fe! eflections it is e"ident that nothing is mo e un.ust than the o#.ections that ha"e #een aised against us$ Existentialism is nothing else than an attem't to d a! all the conse(uences of a cohe ent atheistic 'osition$ It isn0t t *ing to 'lunge man into des'ai at all$ -ut if one calls e"e * attitude of un#elief des'ai & like the ,h istians& then the !o d is not #eing used in its o iginal sense$ Existentialism isn0t so atheistic that it !ea s itself out sho!ing that /od doesn0t exist$ Cathe & it decla es that e"en if /od did exist& that !ould change nothing$ The e *ou0"e got ou 'oint of "ie!$ Not that !e #elie"e that /od exists& #ut !e think that the ' o#lem of His existence is not the issue$ In this sense existentialism is o'timistic& a doct ine of action& and it is 'lain dishonest* fo ,h istians to make no distinction #et!een thei o!n des'ai and ou s and then to call us des'ai ing$ %CEEDOM AND CES@ONSI-ILIT4 Although the conside ations !hich a e a#out to follo! a e of inte est ' ima il* to the ethicist& it ma* ne"e theless #e !o th!hile afte these desc i'tions and a guments to etu n to the f eedom of the fo 3itself and to t * to unde stand !hat the fact of this f eedom e' esents fo human destin*$ The essential conse(uence of ou ea lie ema ks is that man #eing condemned to #e f ee ca ies the !eight of the !hole !o ld on his shoulde s+ he is es'onsi#le fo the !o ld and fo himself as a !a* of #eing$ )e a e taking the !o d 1 es'onsi#ilit*1 in its o dina * sense as 1consciousness FofG #eing the incontesta#le autho of an e"ent o of an o#.ect$1 In this sense the es'onsi#ilit* of the fo 3itself is o"e !helming since heE is the one #* !hom it ha''ens that the e is a !o ld+ since he is also the one !ho makes himself #e& then !hate"e ma* #e the situation in !hich he finds himself& the fo 3itself must !holl* assume this situation !ith its 'eculia coefficient of ad"e sit*& e"en though it #e insu''o ta#le$ He must assume the situation !ith the ' oud consciousness of #eing the autho of it& fo the "e * !o st disad"antages o the !o st th eats !hich can endange m* 'e son ha"e meaning onl* in and th ough m* ' o.ect+ and it is on the g ound of the engagement !hich I am that the* a''ea $ It is the efo e senseless to think of com'laining since nothing fo eign has decided !hat !e feel& !hat !e li"e& o !hat !e a e$ EI am shifting to the 'e sonal ' onoun he e since Sa t e is desc i#ing the fo 3itself in conc ete 'e sonal te ms athe than as a meta'h*sical entit*$ St ictl* s'eaking& of cou se& this is his 'osition th oughout& and the % ench 1il1 is indiffe entl* 1#e1 o 1it$1 T $ %u the mo e this a#solute es'onsi#ilit* is not esignation+ it is sim'l* the logical e(ui ement of the conse(uences of ou f eedom$ )hat ha''ens to me ha''ens th ough me& and I can neithe affect m*self !ith it no e"olt against it no esign m*self to it$ Mo eo"e e"e *thing !hich ha''ens to me is mine$ -* this !e must unde stand fi st of all that I am al!a*s e(ual to !hat ha''ens to me (ua man& fo !hat ha''ens to a man th ough othe men and th ough himself can #e onl* human$ The most te i#le situations of !a & the !o st to tu es do not c eate a non3human state of things+ the e is no non3 human situation$ It is onl* th ough fea & flight& and ecou se to magical t*'es of conduct that I shall decide on the non3 human& #ut this decision is human& and I shall ca * the enti e es'onsi#ilit* fo it$ -ut in addition the situation is mine #ecause it is the image of m* f ee choice of m*self& and e"e *thing !hich it ' esents to me is mine in that this e' esents me and s*m#oli:es me$ Is it not I !ho decide the coefficient of ad"e sit* in things and e"en thei un' edicta#ilit* #* deciding m*self5 Thus the e a e no accidents in a life+ a communit* e"ent !hich suddenl* #u sts fo th and in"ol"es me in it does not come f om the outside$ If I am mo#ili:ed in a !a & this !a is m* !a + it is in m* image and I dese "e it$ I dese "e it fi st #ecause I could al!a*s get out of it #* suicide o #* dese tion+ these ultimate 'ossi#les a e those !hich must al!a*s #e ' esent fo us !hen the e is a (uestion of en"isaging a situation$ %o lack of getting out of it& I ha"e chosen it$ This can #e due to ine tia& to co!a dice in the face of 'u#lic o'inion& o #ecause I ' efe ce tain othe "alues to the "alue of the efusal to .oin in the !a Fthe good o'inion of m* elati"es& the hono of m* famil*& etc$G$ An*!a* *ou look at it& it is a matte of a choice$ This choice !ill #e e'eated late on again and again !ithout a # eak until the end of the !a $ The efo e !e must ag ee !ith the statement #* 9$ Comains& 1In !a the e a e no innocent "ictims$1E If the efo e I ha"e ' efe ed !a to death o to dishono & e"e *thing takes 'lace as if I #o e the enti e es'onsi#ilit* fo this !a $ Of cou se othe s ha"e decla ed it& and one might #e tem'ted 'e ha's to conside me as a sim'le accom'lice$ -ut this notion of com'licit* has onl* a .u idical sense& and it does not hold he e$ %o it de'ended on me that fo me and #* ine this !a should not exist& and I ha"e decided that it does exist$ The e !as no com'ulsion he e& fo the com'ulsion could ha"e got no hold on a f eedom$ I did not ha"e an* excuse+ fo as !e ha"e said e'eatedl* in this #ook& the 'eculia cha acte of human3 ealit* is that it is !ithout excuse$ The efo e it emains fo me onl* to la* claim to this !a $

E 9$ Comains6 Les hommes de #onne "olont8+ 1@ 8lude J ;e dun$1 -ut in addition the !a is mine #ecause #* the sole fact that it a ises in a situation !hich I cause to #e and that I can disco"e it the e onl* #* engaging m*self fo o against it& I can no longe distinguish at ' esent the choice !hich I make of m*self f om the choice !hich I make of the !a $ To li"e this !a is to choose m*self th ough it and to choose it th ough m* choice of m*self$ The e can #e no (uestion of conside ing it as 1fou *ea s of "acation1 o as a 1 e' ie"e&1 as a 1 ecess&1 the essential 'a t of m* es'onsi#ilities #eing else!he e in m* ma ied& famil*& o ' ofessional life$ In this !a !hich I ha"e chosen I choose m*self f om da* to da*& and I make it mine #* making m*self$ If it is going to #e fou em't* *ea s& then it is I !ho #ea the es'onsi#ilit* fo this$ %inall*& as !e 'ointed out ea lie & each 'e son is an a#solute choice of self f om the stand'oint of a !o ld of kno!ledges and of techni(ues !hich this choice #oth assumes and illumines+ each 'e son is an a#solute u'su ge at an a#solute& date and is 'e fectl* unthinka#le at anothe date$ It is the efo e a !aste of time to ask !hat I should ha"e #een if this !a had not # oken out& fo I ha"e chosen m*self as one of the 'ossi#le meanings of the e'och !hich im'e ce'ti#l* led to !a $ I am not distinct f om this same e'och+ I could not #e t ans'o ted to anothe e'och !ithout cont adiction$ Thus I am this !a !hich est icts and limits and makes com' ehensi#le the 'e iod !hich ' eceded it$ In this sense !e ma* define mo e ' ecisel* the es'onsi#ilit* of the fo 3itself if to the ea lie (uoted statement& 1The e a e no innocent "ictims&1 !e add the !o ds& 1)e ha"e the !a !e dese "e$1 Thus& totall* f ee& undistinguisha#le f om the 'e iod fo !hich I ha"e chosen to #e the meaning& as ' ofoundl* es'onsi#le fo the !a as if I had m*self decla ed it& una#le to li"e !ithout integ ating it in m* situation& engaging m*self in it !holl* and stam'ing it !ith m* seal& I must #e !ithout emo se o eg ets as I am !ithout excuse+ fo f om the instant of m* u'su ge into #eing& I ca * the !eight of the !o ld #* m*self alone !ithout an*thing o an* 'e son #eing a#le to lighten it$ 4et this es'onsi#ilit* is of a "e * 'a ticula t*'e$ Someone !ill sa*& 1I did not ask to #e #o n$1 This is a nai"e !a* of th o!ing g eate em'hasis on ou facticit*$ I am es'onsi#le fo e"e *thing& in fact& exce't fo m* "e * es'onsi#ilit*& fo I am not the foundation of m* #eing$ The efo e e"e *thing takes 'lace as if I !e e com'elled to #e es'onsi#le$ I am a#andoned in the !o ld& not in the sense that I might emain a#andoned and 'assi"e in a hostile uni"e se like a #oa d floating on the !ate & #ut athe in the sense that I find m*self suddenl* alone and !ithout hel'& engaged in a !o ld fo !hich I #ea the !hole es'onsi#ilit* !ithout #eing a#le& !hate"e I do& to tea m*self a!a* f om this es'onsi#ilit* fo an instant$ %o I am es'onsi#le fo m* "e * desi e of fleeing es'onsi#ilities$ To make m*self 'assi"e in the !o ld& to efuse to act u'on things and u'on Othe s is still to choose m*self& and suicide is one mode among othe s of #eing3in3the3!o ld$ 4et I find an a#solute es'onsi#ilit* fo the fact that m* facticit* Fhe e the fact of m* #i thG is di ectl* ina'' ehensi#le and e"en inconcei"a#le& fo this fact of m* #i th ne"e a''ea s as a # ute fact #ut al!a*s ac oss a ' o.ecti"e econst uction of m* fo 3itself$ I am ashamed of #eing #o n o I am astonished at it o I e.oice o"e it& o in attem'ting to get id of m* life I affi m that I li"e and I assume this life as #ad$ Thus in a ce tain sense I choose #eing #o n$ This choice itself is integ all* affected !ith facticit* since I am not a#le not to choose& #ut this facticit* in tu n !ill a''ea onl* in so fa as I su 'ass it to!a d m* ends$ Thus facticit* is e"e *!he e #ut ina'' ehensi#le+ I ne"e encounte an*thing exce't m* es'onsi#ilit*$ That is !h* I can not ask& 1)h* !as I #o n51 o cu se the da* of m* #i th o decla e that I did not ask to #e #o n& fo these "a ious attitudes to!a d m* #i th33i$e$& to!a d the fact that I eali:e a ' esence in the !o ld33a e a#solutel* nothing else #ut !a*s of assuming this #i th in full es'onsi#ilit* and of making it mine$ He e again I encounte onl* m*self and m* ' o.ects so that finall* m* a#andonment33i$e$& m* facticit*33consists sim'l* in the fact that I am condemned to #e !holl* es'onsi#le fo m*self$ I am the #eing !hich is in such a !a* that in its #eing its #eing is in (uestion$ And this 1is1 of m* #eing is as ' esent and ina'' ehensi#le$ Unde these conditions since e"e * e"ent in the !o ld can #e e"ealed to me onl* as an o''o tunit* Fan o''o tunit* made use of& lacked& neglected& etc$G& o #ette *et since e"e *thing !hich ha''ens to us can #e conside ed as a chance Fi$e$& can a''ea to us onl* as a !a* of eali:ing this #eing !hich is in (uestion in ou #eingG and since othe s as t anscendences3 t anscended a e themsel"es onl* o''o tunities and chances& the es'onsi#ilit* of the fo 3itself extends to the enti e !o ld as a 'eo'led3!o ld$ It is ' ecisel* thus that the fo 3itself a'' ehends itself in anguish+ that is& as a #eing !hich is neithe the foundation of its o!n #eing no of the Othe 0s #eing no of the in3itselfs !hich fo m the !o ld& #ut a #eing !hich is com'elled to decide the meaning of #eing33!ithin it and e"e *!he e outside of it$ The one !ho eali:es in anguish his condition as #eing th o!n into a es'onsi#ilit* !hich extends to his "e * a#andonment has no longe eithe emo se o eg et o excuse+ he is no longe an*thing #ut a f eedom !hich 'e fectl* e"eals itself and !hose #eing esides in this "e * e"elation$ -ut as !e 'ointed out at the #eginning of this !o k& most of the time !e flee anguish in #ad faith THE DESICE TO -E /OD The most disce ning ethicists ha"e sho!n ho! a desi e eaches #e*ond itself$ @ascal #elie"ed that he could disco"e in hunting& fo exam'le& o tennis& o in a hund ed othe occu'ations& the need of #eing di"e ted$ He e"ealed that in an acti"it* !hich !ould #e a#su d if educed to itself& the e !as a meaning !hich t anscended it+ that is& an indication !hich efe ed to the ealit* of man in gene al and to his condition$ Simila l* Stendhal in s'ite of his attachment to ideologists& and @ oust in s'ite of his intellectualistic and anal*tical tendencies& ha"e sho!n that lo"e and .ealous* can not #e educed to the st ict desi e of 'ossessing a 'a ticula !oman& #ut that these emotions aim at la*ing hold of the !o ld in its enti et*

th ough the !oman$ This is the meaning of Stendhal0s c *stalli:ation& and it is ' ecisel* fo this eason that Lo"e as Stendhal desc i#es it a''ea s as a mode of #eing in the !o ld$ Lo"e is a fundamental elation of the fo 3itself to the !o ld and to itself FselfnessG th ough a 'a ticula !oman+ the !oman e' esents onl* a conducting #od* !hich is 'laced in the ci cuit$ These anal*ses ma* #e inexact o onl* 'a tiall* t ue+ ne"e theless the* make us sus'ect a method othe than 'u e anal*tical desc i'tion$ In the same !a* ,atholic no"elists immediatel* see in ca nal lo"e its su 'assing to!a d /od33in Don 9uan& 1the ete nall* unsatisfied&1 in sin& 1the 'lace em't* of /od$1 The e is no (uestion he e of finding again an a#st act #ehind the conc ete+ the im'ulse to!a d /od is no less conc ete than the im'ulse to!a d a 'a ticula !oman$ On the cont a *& it is a matte of edisco"e ing unde the 'a tial and incom'lete as'ects of the su#.ect the "e ita#le conc eteness !hich can #e onl* the totalit* of his im'ulse to!a d #eing& his o iginal elation to himself& to the !o ld& and to the Othe & in the unit* of inte nal elations and of a fundamental ' o.ect$ This im'ulse can #e onl* 'u el* indi"idual and uni(ue$ %a f om est anging us f om the 'e son& as -ou get0s anal*sis& fo exam'le& does in constituting the indi"idual #* means of a summation of gene al maxims& this im'ulse !ill not lead us to find in the need of ! iting33and of ! iting 'a ticula #ooks33the need of acti"it* in gene al$ On the cont a *& e.ecting e(uall* the theo * of mallea#le cla* and that of the #undle of d i"es& !e !ill disco"e the indi"idual 'e son in the initial ' o.ect !hich constitutes him$ It is fo this eason that the i educi#ilit* of the esult attained !ill #e e"ealed as self3e"ident& not #ecause it is the 'oo est and the most a#st act #ut #ecause it is the ichest$ The intuition he e !ill #e accom'anied #* an indi"idual fullness$ THE DESICE TO -E /OD Fcont$G The -est )a* to concei"e of the fundamental ' o.ect of human ealit* is to sa* that man is the #eing !hose ' o.ect is to #e /od$ )hate"e ma* #e the m*ths and ites of the eligion conside ed& /od is fi st 1sensi#le to the hea t1 of man as the one !ho identifies and defines him in his ultimate and fundamental ' o.ect$ If man 'ossesses a ' e3ontological com' ehension of the #eing of /od& it is not the g eat !onde s of natu e no the 'o!e of societ* !hich ha"e confe ed it u'on him$ /od& "alue and su' eme end of t anscendence& e' esents the 'e manent limit in te ms of !hich man makes kno!n to himself !hat he is$ To #e man means to each to!a d #eing /od$ O if *ou ' efe & man fundamentall* is the desi e to #e /od$ It ma* #e asked& if man on coming into the !o ld is #o ne to!a d /od as to!a d his limit& if he can choose onl* to #e /od& !hat #ecomes of f eedom5 %o f eedom is nothing othe than a choice !hich c eates fo itself its o!n 'ossi#ilities& #ut it a''ea s he e that the initial ' o.ect of #eing /od& !hich 1defines1 man& comes close to #eing the same as a human 1natu e1 o an 1essence$1 The ans!e is that !hile the meaning of the desi e is ultimatel* the ' o.ect of #eing /od& the desi e is ne"e constituted #* this meaning+ on the cont a *& it al!a*s e' esents a 'a ticula disco"e * of its ends$ These ends in fact a e 'u sued in te ms of a 'a ticula em'i ical situation& and it is this "e * 'u suit !hich constitutes the su oundings as a situation$ The desi e of #eing is al!a*s eali:ed as the desi e of a mode of #eing$ And this desi e of a mode of #eing ex' esses itself in tu n as the meaning of the m* iads of conc ete desi es !hich constitute the !e# of ou conscious life$ Thus !e find ou sel"es #efo e "e * com'lex s*m#olic st uctu es !hich ha"e at least th ee sto ies$ In em'i ical desi e I can disce n a s*m#oli:ation of a fundamental conc ete desi e !hich is the 'e son himself and !hich e' esents the mode in !hich he has decided that #eing !ould #e in (uestion in his #eing$ This fundamental desi e in tu n ex' esses conc etel* in the !o ld !ithin the 'a ticula situation en"elo'ing the indi"idual& an a#st act meaningful st uctu e !hich is the desi e of #eing in gene al+ it must #e conside ed as human ealit* in the 'e son& and it # ings a#out his communit* !ith othe s& thus making it 'ossi#le to state that the e is a t uth conce ning man and not onl* conce ning indi"iduals !ho cannot #e com'a ed$ A#solute conc eteness& com'letion& existence as a totalit* #elong then to the f ee and fundamental desi e !hich is the uni(ue 'e son$ Em'i ical desi e is onl* a s*m#oli:ation of this+ it efe s to this and de i"es its meaning f om it !hile emaining 'a tial and educi#le& fo the em'i ical desi e can not #e concei"ed in isolation$ On the othe hand& the desi e of #eing in its a#st act 'u it* is the t uth of the conc ete fundamental desi e& #ut it does not exist #* "i tue of ealit*$ Thus the fundamental ' o.ect& the 'e son& the f ee eali:ation of human t uth is e"e *!he e in all desi es Fsa"e fo those exce'tions t eated in the ' eceding cha'te & conce ning& fo exam'le& 1indiffe ents1G$ It is ne"e a'' ehended exce't th ough desi es3as !e can a'' ehend s'ace onl* th ough #odies !hich sha'e it fo us& though s'ace is a s'ecific ealit* and not a conce't$ O & if *ou like& it is like the o#.ect of Husse l& !hich e"eals itself onl* #* A#schattungen& and !hich ne"e theless does not allo! itself to #e a#so #ed #* an* one A#schattung$ )e can unde stand afte these ema ks that the a#st act& ontological 1desi e to #e1 is una#le to e' esent the fundamental& human st uctu e of the indi"idual+ it cannot #e an o#stacle to his f eedom$ % eedom in fact& as !e ha"e sho!n in the ' eceding cha'te & is st ictl* identified !ith nihilation$ The onl* #eing !hich can #e called f ee is the #eing !hich nihilates its #eing$ Mo eo"e !e kno! that nihilation is lack of #eing and can not #e othe !ise$ % eedom is ' ecisel* the #eing !hich makes itself a lack of #eing$ -ut since desi e& as !e ha"e esta#lished& is identical !ith lack of #eing& f eedom can a ise onl* as #eing !hich makes itself a desi e of #eing+ that is& as the ' o.ect3fo 3itself of #eing in3itself3fo itself$ He e !e ha"e a i"ed at an a#st act st uctu e !hich can #* no means #e conside ed as the natu e o essence of f eedom$ % eedom is existence& and in it existence ' ecedes essence$ The u'su ge of f eedom is immediate and conc ete and is not to #e distinguished f om its choice+ that is& f om the 'e son himself$ -ut the st uctu e unde conside ation can #e called the t uth of f eedom+ that is& it is the human meaning of f eedom$ It should #e 'ossi#le to esta#lish the human t uth of the 'e son& as !e ha"e attem'ted to do #* an ontological 'henomenolog*$ The catalogue of em'i ical desi es ought to #e made the o#.ect of a'' o' iate 's*chological in"estigAtions& o#se "ation and induction and& as needed& ex'e ience can se "e to d a! u' this list$ The* !ill indicate to the 'hiloso'he the com' ehensi#le elations !hich unite to each othe "a ious desi es and "a ious 'atte ns of #eha"io s& and !ill # ing to light ce tain conc ete connections #et!een the su#.ect of ex'e ience and 1situations1 ex'e ientiall*

defined F!hich at #ottom o iginate onl* f om limitations a''lied in the name of 'ositi"it* to the fundamental situation of the su#.ect in the !o ldG$ -ut in esta#lishing and classif*ing fundamental desi es of indi"idual 'e sons neithe of these methods is a'' o' iate$ Actuall* the e can #e no (uestion of dete mining a ' io i and ontologicall* !hat a''ea s in all the un' edicta#ilit* of a f ee act$ This is !h* !e shall limit ou sel"es he e to indicating "e * summa il* the 'ossi#ilities of such a (uest and its 'e s'ecti"es$ The "e * fact that !e can su#.ect an* man !hatsoe"e to such an in"estigation33that is !hat #elongs to human ealit* in gene al$ O & if *ou ' efe & this is !hat can #e esta#lished #* an ontolog*$ -ut the in(ui * itself and its esults a e on ' inci'le !holl* outside the 'ossi#ilities of an ontolog*$ EXISTENTIALIST @S4,HOANAL4SIS The ' inci'le of this 's*choanal*sis is that man is a totalit* and not a collection$ ,onse(uentl* he ex' esses himself as a !hole in e"en his most insignificant and his most su'e ficial #eha"io $ In othe !o ds the e is not a taste& a manne ism& o a human act !hich is not e"ealing$ The goal of 's*choanal*sis is to deci'he the em'i ical #eha"io 'atte ns of man+ that is to # ing out in the o'en the e"elations !hich each one of them contains and to fix them conce'tuall*$ Its 'oint of de'a tu e is ex'e ience+ its 'illa of su''o t is the fundamental& ' e3ontological com' ehension !hich man has of the human 'e son$ Although the ma.o it* of 'eo'le can !ell igno e the indications contained in a gestu e& a !o d& a sign and can look !ith sco n on the e"elation !hich the* ca *& each human indi"idual ne"e theless 'ossesses a ' io i the meaning of the e"elato * "alue of these manifestations and is ca'a#le of deci'he ing them& at least if he is aided and guided #* a hel'ing hand$ He e as else!he e& t uth is not encounte ed #* chance+ it does not #elong to a domain !he e one must seek it !ithout e"e ha"ing an* ' esentiment of its location& as one can go to look fo the sou ce of the Nile o of the Nige $ It #elongs a ' io i to human com' ehension and the essential task is an he meneutic+ that is& a deci'he ing& a dete mination& and a conce'tuali:ation$ Its method is com'a ati"e$ Since each exam'le of human conduct s*m#oli:es in its o!n manne the fundamental choice !hich must #e # ought to light& and since at the same time each one disguises this choice unde its occasional cha acte and its histo ical o''o tunit*& onl* the com'a ison of these acts of conduct can effect the eme gence of the uni(ue e"elation !hich the* all ex' ess in a diffe ent !a*$ The fi st outline of this method has #een fu nished fo us #* the 's*choanal*sis of % eud and his disci'les$ %o this eason it !ill #e ' ofita#le he e to indicate mo e s'ecificall* the 'oints !he e existential 's*choanal*sis !ill #e ins'i ed #* 's*choanal*sis ' o'e and those !he e it !ill adicall* diffe f om it$ -oth kinds of 's*choanal*sis conside all o#.ecti"el* disce ni#le manifestations of 1's*chic life1 as s*m#ols maintaining s*m#olic elations to the fundamental& total st uctu es !hich constitute the indi"idual 'e son$ -oth conside that the e a e no ' ima * gi"ens such as he edita * dis'ositions& cha acte & etc$ Existential 's*choanal*sis ecogni:es nothing #efo e the o iginal u'su ge of human f eedom+ em'i ical 's*choanal*sis holds that the o iginal affecti"it* of the indi"idual is "i gin !ax #efo e its histo *$ The li#ido is nothing #esides its conc ete fixations& sa"e fo a 'e manent 'ossi#ilit* of fixing an*thing !hatsoe"e u'on an*thing !hatsoe"e $ -oth conside the human #eing as a 'e 'etual& sea ching& histo i:ation$ Cathe than unco"e ing static& constant gi"ens the* disco"e the meaning& o ientation& and ad"entu es of this histo *$ Due to this fact #oth conside man in the !o ld and do not imagine that one can (uestion the #eing of a man !ithout taking into account all his situation$ @s*chological in"estigations aim at econstituting the life of the su#.ect f om #i th to the moment of the cu e+ the* utili:e all the o#.ecti"e documentation !hich the* can find+ lette s& !itnesses& intimate dia ies& 1social1 info mation of e"e * kind$ )hat the* aim at esto ing is less a 'u e 's*chic e"ent than a t!ofold st uctu e6 the c ucial e"ent of infanc* and the 's*chic c *stalli:ation a ound this e"ent$ He e again !e ha"e to do !ith a situation$ Each 1histo ical1 fact f om this 'oint of "ie! !ill #e conside ed at once as a facto of the 's*chic e"olution and as a s*m#ol of that e"olution$ %o it is nothing in itself$ It o'e ates onl* acco ding to the !a* in !hich it is taken and this "e * manne of taking it ex' esses s*m#olicall* the inte nal dis'osition of the indi"idual$ Em'i ical 's*choanal*sis and existential 's*choanal*sis #oth sea ch !ithin an existing situation fo a fundamental attitude !hich can not #e ex' essed #* sim'le& logical definitions #ecause it is ' io to all logic& and !hich e(ui es econst uction acco ding to the la!s of s'ecific s*ntheses$ Em'i ical 's*choanal*sis seeks to dete mine the com'lex& the "e * name of !hich indicates the 'ol*"alence of all the meanings !hich a e efe ed #ack to it$ Existential 's*choanal*sis seeks to dete mine the o iginal choice$ This o iginal choice o'e ating in the face of the !o ld and #eing a choice of 'osition in the !o ld is total like the com'lex+ it is ' io to logic like the com'lex$ It is this !hich decides the attitude of the 'e son !hen conf onted !ith logic and ' inci'les+ the efo e the e can #e no 'ossi#ilit* of (uestioning it in confo mance to logic$ It # ings togethe in a ' elogical s*nthesis the totalit* of the existent& and as such it is the cente of efe ence fo an infinit* of 'ol*"alent meanings$ -oth ou 's*choanal*ses efuse to admit that the su#.ect is in a ' i"ileged 'osition to ' oceed in these in(ui ies conce ning himself$ The* e(uall* insist on a st ictl* o#.ecti"e method& using as documenta * e"idence the data of eflection as !ell as the testimon* of othe s$ Of cou se the su#.ect can unde take a 's*choanal*tic in"estigation of himself$ -ut in this case he must enounce at the outset all #enefit stemming f om his 'eculia 'osition and must (uestion himself exactl* as if he !e e someone else$ Em'i ical 's*choanal*sis in fact is #ased on the h*'othesis of the existence of an unconscious 's*che& !hich on ' inci'le esca'es the intuition of the su#.ect$ Existential 's*choanal*sis e.ects the h*'othesis of the unconscious+ it makes the 's*chic act coextensi"e !ith consciousness$ -ut if the fundamental ' o.ect is full* ex'e ienced #* the su#.ect and hence !holl* conscious& that ce tainl* does not mean that it must #* the same token #e kno!n #* him+ (uite the cont a *$ The eade !ill 'e ha's ecall the ca e !e took in the Int oduction to distinguish #et!een consciousness and kno!ledge$ To #e su e& as !e ha"e seen ea lie & eflection can #e conside ed as a (uasikno!ledge$ -ut !hat it g as's at

each moment is not the 'u e ' o.ect of the fo 3itself as it is s*m#olicall* ex' essed33often in se"e al !a*s at once33#* the conc ete #eha"io !hich it a'' ehends$ It g as's the conc ete #eha"io itself+ that is& the s'ecific dated desi e in all its cha acte istic net!o k$ It g as's at once s*m#ol and s*m#oli:ation$ This a'' ehension& to #e su e& is enti el* constituted #* a ' e3ontological com' ehension of the fundamental ' o.ect+ #ette *et& in so fa as eflection is almost a non3thetic consciousness of itself as eflection& it is this same ' o.ect& as !ell as the non3 eflecti"e consciousness$ -ut it does not follo! that it commands the inst uments and techni(ues necessa * to isolate the choice s*m#oli:ed& to fix it #* conce'ts& and to # ing it fo th into the full light of da*$ It is 'enet ated #* a g eat light !ithout #eing a#le to ex' ess !hat this light is illuminating$ )e a e not dealing !ith an unsol"ed iddle as the % eudians #elie"e+ all is the e& luminous+ eflection is in full 'ossession of it& a'' ehends all$ -ut this 1m*ste * in # oad da*light1 is due to the fact that this 'ossession is de' i"ed of the means !hich !ould o dina il* 'e mit anal*sis and conce'tuali:ation$ It g as's e"e *thing& all at once& !ithout shading& !ithout elief& !ithout connections of g andeu 33not that these shades& these "alues& these eliefs exist some!he e and a e hidden f om it& #ut athe #ecause the* must #e esta#lished #* anothe human attitude and #ecause the* can exist onl* #* means of and fo kno!ledge$ Ceflection& una#le to se "e as the #asis fo existential 's*choanal*sis& !ill then sim'l* fu nish us !ith the # ute mate ials to!a d !hich the 's*choanal*st must take an o#.ecti"e attitude$ Thus onl* !ill he #e a#le to kno! !hat he al ead* unde stands$ The esult is that com'lexes u' ooted f om the de'ths of the unconscious& like ' o.ects e"ealed #* existential 's*choanal*sis& !ill #e a'' ehended f om the 'oint of "ie! of the Othe $ ,onse(uentl* the o#.ect thus # ought into the light !ill #e a ticulated acco ding to the st uctu es of the t anscended3t anscendence+ that is& its #eing !ill #e the #eing3fo 3othe s e"en if the 's*choanal*st and the su#.ect of the 's*choanal*sis a e actuall* the same 'e son$ Thus the ' o.ect !hich is # ought to light #* eithe kind of 's*choanal*sis can #e onl* the totalit* of the indi"idual human #eing& the i educi#le element of the t anscendence !ith the st uctu e of #eing3fo 3othe s$ )hat al!a*s esca'es these methods of in"estigation is the ' o.ect as it is fo itself& the com'lex in its o!n #eing$ This ' o.ect3fo 3itself can #e ex'e ienced onl* as a li"ing 'ossession+ the e is an incom'ati#ilit* #et!een existence3fo 3itself and o#.ecti"e existence$ -ut the o#.ect of the t!o 's*choanal*ses has in it nonetheless the ealit* of a #eing+ the su#.ect0s kno!ledge of it can in addition cont i#ute to cla if* eflection& and that eflection can then #ecome a 'ossession !hich !ill #e a (uasi3 kno!ing$ At this 'oint the simila it* #et!een the t!o kinds of 's*choanal*sis ceases$ The* diffe fundamentall* in that em'i ical 's*choanal*sis has decided u'on its o!n i educi#le instead of allo!ing this to make itself kno!n in a self3e"ident intuition$ The li#ido o the !ill to 'o!e in actualit* constitutes a 's*cho3#iological esidue !hich is not clea in itself and !hich does not a''ea to us as #eing #efo ehand the i educi#le limit of the in"estigation$ %inall* it is ex'e ience !hich esta#lishes that the foundation of com'lexes is this li#ido o this !ill to 'o!e + and these esults of em'i ical in(ui * a e 'e fectl* contingent& the* a e not con"incing$ Nothing ' e"ents ou concei"ing a ' io i of a 1human ealit*1 !hich !ould not #e ex' essed #* the !ill to 'o!e & fo !hich the li#ido !ould not constitute the o iginal& undiffe entiated ' o.ect$ On the othe hand& the choice to !hich existential 's*choanal*sis !ill lead us& ' ecisel* #ecause it is a choice& accounts fo its o iginal contingenc*& fo the contingenc* of the choice is the e"e se side of its f eedom$ %u the mo e& inasmuch as it is esta#lished on the lack of #eing& concei"ed as a fundamental cha acte istic of #eing& it ecei"es its legitimac* as a choice& and !e kno! that !e do not ha"e to 'ush fu the $ Each esult then !ill #e at once full* contingent and legitimatel* i educi#le$ Mo eo"e it !ill al!a*s emain 'a ticula + that is& !e !ill not achie"e as the ultimate goal of ou in"estigation and the foundation of all #eha"io an a#st act& gene al te m& li#ido fo exam'le& !hich !ould #e diffe entiated and made conc ete fi st in com'lexes and then in detailed acts of conduct& due to the action of exte nal facts and the histo * of the su#.ect$ On the cont a *& it !ill #e a choice !hich emains uni(ue and !hich is f om the sta t a#solute conc eteness$ Details of #eha"io can ex' ess o 'a ticula i:e this choice& #ut the* can not make it mo e conc ete than is al ead* kno!n in a self3e"ident intuition$ The li#ido o the !ill to 'o!e is in us$ That is #ecause the choice is nothing othe than the #eing of each human ealit*+ this amounts to sa*ing that a 'a ticula 'a tial #eha"io is o ex' esses the o iginal choice of this human ealit* since fo human ealit* the e is no diffe ence #et!een existing and choosing fo itself$ % om this fact !e unde stand that existential 's*choanal*sis does not ha"e to ' oceed f om the fundamental 1com'lex&1 !hich is exactl* the choice of #eing& to an a#st action like the li#ido !hich !ould ex'lain it$ The com'lex is the ultimate choice& it is the choice of #eing and makes itself such$ - inging it into the light !ill e"eal it each time as e"identl* i educi#le$ It follo!s necessa il* that the li#ido and the !ill to 'o!e !ill a''ea to existential 's*choanal*sis neithe as gene al cha acte istics common to all mankind no as i educi#les$ At most it !ill #e 'ossi#le afte the in"estigation to esta#lish that the* ex' ess #* "i tue of 'a ticula ensem#les in ce tain su#.ects a fundamental choice !hich can not #e educed to eithe one of them$ )e ha"e seen in fact that desi e and sexualit* in gene al ex' ess an o iginal effo t of the fo 3itself to eco"e its #eing !hich has #ecome est anged th ough contact !ith the Othe $ The !ill to 'o!e also o iginall* su''oses #eing3fo 3othe s& the com' ehension of the Othe & and the choice of !inning its o!n sal"ation #* means of the Othe $ The foundation of this attitude must #e an o iginal choice !hich !ould make us unde stand the adical identification of #eing3in3itself3fo 3itself !ith #eing3fo 3othe s$ The fact that the ultimate te m of this existential in(ui * must #e a choice& distinguishes e"en #ette the 's*choanal*sis fo !hich !e ha"e outlined the method and ' inci'al featu es$ It the e#* a#andons the su''osition that the en"i onment acts mechanicall* on the su#.ect unde conside ation$ The en"i onment can act on the su#.ect onl* to the exact extent that he com' ehends it+ that is& t ansfo ms it into a situation$ Hence no o#.ecti"e desc i'tion of this en"i onment could #e of an* use to us$ % om the sta t the en"i onment concei"ed as a situation efe s to the fo 3itself !hich is choosing& .ust as the fo 3 itself efe s to the en"i onment #* the "e * fact that the fo 3itself is in the !o ld$ -* enouncing all mechanical causation&

!e enounce at the same time all gene al inte ' etation of the s*m#oli:ation conf onted$ Ou goal could not #e to esta#lish em'i ical la!s of succession& no could !e constitute a uni"e sal s*m#olism$ Cathe the 's*choanal*st !ill ha"e to edisco"e at each ste' a s*m#ol functioning in the 'a ticula case !hich he is conside ing$ If each #eing is a totalit*& it is not concei"a#le that the e can exist elementa * s*m#olic elationshi's Fe$g$& the faeces K gold& o a 'incushion K the # eastG !hich ' ese "e a constant meaning in all cases+ that is& !hich emain unalte ed !hen the* 'ass f om one meaningful ensem#le to anothe ensem#le$ %u the mo e the 's*choanal*st !ill ne"e lose sight of the fact that the choice is li"ing and conse(uentl* can #e e"oked #* the su#.ect !ho is #eing studied$ )e ha"e sho!n in the ' eceding cha'te the im'o tance of the instant& !hich e' esents a# u't changes in o ientation and the assuming of a ne! 'osition in the face of an unalte a#le 'ast$ % om this moment on& !e must al!a*s #e ead* to conside that s*m#ols change meaning and to a#andon the s*m#ol used hithe to$ Thus existential 's*choanal*sis !ill ha"e to #e com'letel* flexi#le and ada't itself to the slightest o#se "a#le changes in the su#.ect$ Ou conce n he e is to unde stand !hat is indi"idual and often e"en instantaneous$ The method !hich has se "ed fo one su#.ect !ill not necessa il* #e suita#le to use fo anothe su#.ect o fo the same su#.ect at a late 'e iod$ @ ecisel* #ecause the goal of the in(ui * must #e to disco"e a choice and not a state& the in"estigato must ecall on e"e * occasion that his o#.ect is not a datum #u ied in the da kness of the unconscious #ut a f ee& conscious dete mination33 !hich is not e"en esident in consciousness& #ut !hich is one !ith this consciousness itself$ Em'i ical 's*choanal*sis& to the extent that its method is #ette than its ' inci'les& is often in sight of an existential disco"e *& #ut it al!a*s sto's 'a t !a*$ )hen it thus a'' oaches the fundamental choice& the esistance of the su#.ect colla'ses suddenl* and he ecogni:es the image of himself !hich is ' esented to him as if he !e e seeing himself in a mi o $ This in"olunta * testimon* of the su#.ect is ' ecious fo the 's*choanal*st+ he sees the e the sign that he has eached his goal+ he can 'ass on f om the in"estigation ' o'e to the cu e$ -ut nothing in his ' inci'les o in his initial 'ostulates 'e mits him to unde stand o to utili:e this testimon*$ )he e could he get an* such ight5 If the com'lex is eall* unconscious33that is& if the e is a #a ie se'a ating the sign f om the thing signified33ho! could the su#.ect ecogni:e it5 Does the unconscious com'lex ecogni:e itself5 -ut ha"en0t !e #een told that it lacks unde standing5 And if of necessit* !e g anted to it the facult* of unde standing the signs& !ould this not #e to make of it #* the same token a conscious unconscious5 )hat is unde standing if not to #e conscious of !hat is unde stood5 Shall !e sa* on the othe hand that it is the su#.ect as conscious !ho ecogni:es the image ' esented5 -ut ho! could he com'a e it !ith his t ue state since that is out of each and since he has ne"e had an* kno!ledge of it5 At most he !ill #e a#le to .udge that the 's*choanal*tic ex'lanation of his case is a ' o#a#le h*'othesis& !hich de i"es its ' o#a#ilit* f om the num#e of #eha"io 'atte ns !hich it ex'lains$ His elation to this inte ' etation is that of a thi d 'a t*& that of the 's*choanal*st himself+ he has no ' i"ileged 'osition$ And if he #elie"es in the ' o#a#ilit* of the 's*choanal*tic h*'othesis& is this sim'le #elief& !hich li"es in the limits of his consciousness& a#le to effect the # eakdo!n of the #a ie s !hich dam u' the unconscious tendencies5 The 's*choanal*st dou#tless has some o#scu e 'ictu e of an a# u't coincidence of conscious and unconscious$ -ut he has emo"ed all methods of concei"ing of this coincidence in an* 'ositi"e sense$ Still& the enlightenment of the su#.ect is a fact$ The e is an intuition he e !hich is accom'anied #* e"idence$ The su#.ect guided #* the 's*choanal*st does mo e and #ette than to gi"e his ag eement to an h*'othesis+ he touches it& he sees !hat it is$ This is t ul* unde standa#le onl* if the su#.ect has ne"e ceased #eing conscious of his dee' tendencies+ #ette *et& onl* if these d i"es a e not distinguished f om his conscious self$ In this case as !e ha"e seen& the t aditional 's*choanal*tic inte ' etation does not cause him to attain consciousness of !hat he is+ it causes him to attain kno!ledge of !hat he is$ It is existential 's*choanal*sis then !hich claims the final intuition of the su#.ect as decisi"e$ This com'a ison allo!s us to unde stand #ette !hat an existential 's*choanal*sis must #e if it is entitled to exist$ It is a method destined to # ing to light& in a st ictl* o#.ecti"e fo m& the su#.ecti"e choice #* !hich each li"ing 'e son makes himself a 'e son+ that is& makes kno!n to himself !hat he is$ Since !hat the method seeks is a choice of #eing at the same time as a #eing& it must educe 'a ticula #eha"io 'atte ns to fundamental elations33not of sexualit* o of the !ill to 'o!e & #ut of #eing33!hich a e ex' essed in this #eha"io $ It is then guided f om the sta t to!a d a com' ehension of #eing and must not assign itself an* othe goal than to disco"e #eing and the mode of #eing of the #eing conf onting this #eing$ It is fo #idden to sto' #efo e attaining this goal$ It !ill utili:e the com' ehension of #eing !hich cha acte i:es the in"estigato inasmuch as he is himself a human ealit*+ and as it seeks to detach #eing f om its s*m#olic ex' essions& it !ill ha"e to edisco"e each time on the #asis of a com'a ati"e stud* of acts a id attitudes& a s*m#ol destined to deci'he them$ Its c ite ion of success !ill #e the num#e of facts !hich its h*'othesis 'e mits it to ex'lain and to unif* as !ell as the self3e"ident intuition of the i educi#ilit* of the end attained$ To this c ite ion !ill #e added in all cases !he e it is 'ossi#le& the decisi"e testimon* of the su#.ect$ The esults thus achie"ed33that is& the ultimate ends of the indi"idual33can then #ecome the o#.ect of a classification& and it is #* the com'a ison of these esults that !e !ill #e a#le to esta#lish gene al conside ations a#out human ealit* as an em'i ical choice of its o!n ends$ The #eha"io studied #* this 's*choanal*sis !ill include not onl* d eams& failu es& o#sessions& and neu oses& #ut also and es'eciall* the thoughts of !aking life& successfull* ad.usted acts& st*le& etc$ This 's*choanal*sis has not *et found its % eud$ At most !e can find the fo eshado!ing of it in ce tain 'a ticula l* successful #iog a'hies$ )e ho'e to #e a#le to attem't else!he e t!o exam'les in elation to %lau#e t and Dostoe"sk*$ -ut it matte s little to us !hethe it no! exists+ the im'o tant thing is that it is 'ossi#le$ THE HOLE In itself the hole is the s*m#ol of a mode of #eing !hich existential 's*choanal*sis must elucidate$

)e can not make such a detailed stud* he e$ One can see at once& ho!e"e & that the hole is o iginall* ' esented as a nothingness 1to #e filled1 !ith m* o!n flesh+ the child can not est ain himself f om 'utting his finge o his !hole a m into the hole$ It ' esents itself to me as the em't* image of m*self$ I ha"e onl* to c a!l into it in o de to make m*self exist in the !o ld !hich a!aits me$ The ideal of the hole is then an exca"ation !hich can #e ca efull* moulded a#out m* flesh in such a manne that #* s(uee:ing m*self into it and fitting m*self tightl* inside it& I shall cont i#ute to making a fullness of #eing exist in the !o ld$ Thus to 'lug u' a hole means o iginall* to make a sac ifice of m* #od* in o de that the 'lenitude of #eing ma* exist+ that is& to su#.ect the 'assion of the %o 3itself so as to sha'e& to 'e fect& and to ' ese "e the totalit* of the In3itself$E E )e should note as !ell the im'o tance of the o''osite tendenc*& to 'oke th ough holes& !hich in itself demands an existential anal*sis$ He e at its o igin !e g as' one of the most fundamental tendencies of human ealit*33the tendenc* to fill$ )e shall meet !ith this tendenc* again in the adolescent and in the adult$ A good 'a t of ou life is 'assed in 'lugging u' holes& in filling em't* 'laces& in eali:ing and s*m#olicall* esta#lishing a 'lenitude$ The child ecogni:es as the esults of his fi st ex'e iences that he himself has holes$ )hen he 'uts his finge s in his mouth& he t ies to !all u' the holes in his face+ he ex'ects that his finge !ill me ge !ith his li's and the oof of his mouth and #lock u' the #uccal o ifice as one fills the c ack in a !all !ith cement+ he seeks again the densit*& the unifo m and s'he ical 'lenitude of @a menidean #eing+ if he sucks his thum#& it is ' ecisel* in o de to dissol"e it& to t ansfo m it into a stick* 'aste !hich !ill seal the hole of his mouth$ This tendenc* is ce tainl* one of the most fundamental among those !hich se "e as the #asis fo the act of eating+ nou ishment is the 1cement1 !hich !ill seal the mouth+ to eat is among othe things to #e filled u'$ It is onl* f om this stand'oint that !e can 'ass on to sexualit*$ The o#scenit* of the feminine sex is that of e"e *thing !hich 1ga'es o'en$1 It is an a''eal to #eing as all holes a e$ In he self !oman a''eals to a st ange flesh !hich is to t ansfo m he into a fullness of #eing #* 'enet ation and dissolution$ ,on"e sel* !oman senses he condition as an a''eal ' ecisel* #ecause she is 1in the fo m of a hole$1 This is the t ue o igin of Adle 0s com'lex$ -e*ond an* dou#t he sex is a mouth and a "o acious mouth !hich de"ou s the 'enis33a fact !hich can easil* lead to the idea of cast ation$ The amo ous act is the cast ation of the man+ #ut this is a#o"e all #ecause sex is a hole$ )e ha"e to do he e !ith a ' e3sexual cont i#ution !hich !ill #ecome one of the com'onents of sexualit* as an em'i ical& com'lex& human attitude #ut !hich fa f om de i"ing its o igin f om the sexed #eing has nothing in common !ith #asic sexualit*& the natu e of !hich !e ha"e ex'lained in @a t III$ Ne"e theless the ex'e ience !ith the hole& !hen the infant sees the ealit*& includes the ontological ' esentiment of sexual ex'e ience in gene al+ it is !ith his flesh that the child sto's u' the hole and the hole& #efo e all sexual s'ecification& is an o#scene ex'ectation& an a''eal to the flesh$ )e can see the im'o tance !hich the elucidation of these immediate and conc ete existential catego ies !ill assume fo existential 's*choanal*sis$ In this !a* !e can a'' ehend the "e * gene al ' o.ects of human ealit*$ -ut !hat chiefl* inte ests the 's*choanal*st is to dete mine the f ee ' o.ect of the uni(ue 'e son in te ms of the indi"idual elation !hich unites him to these "a ious s*m#ols of #eing$ I can lo"e slim* contacts& ha"e a ho o of holes& etc$ That does not mean that fo me the slim*& the g eas*& a hole& etc$ ha"e lost thei gene al ontological meaning& #ut on the cont a * that #ecause of this meaning& I dete mine m*self in this o that manne in elation to them$ If the slim* is indeed the s*m#ol of a #eing in !hich the fo 3itself is s!allo!ed u' #* the in3itself& !hat kind of a 'e son am I if in encounte ing othe s& I lo"e the slim*5 To !hat fundamental ' o.ect of m*self am I efe ed if I !ant to ex'lain this lo"e of an am#iguous& sucking in3 itself5 In this !a* tastes do not emain i educi#le gi"ens+ if one kno!s ho! to (uestion them& the* e"eal to us the fundamental ' o.ects of the 'e son$ Do!n to e"en ou alimenta * ' efe ences the* all ha"e a meaning$ )e can account fo this fact if !e !ill eflect that each taste is ' esented& not as an a#su d datum !hich !e must excuse #ut as an e"ident "alue$ If I like the taste of ga lic& it seems i ational to me that othe 'eo'le can not like it$ To eat is to a'' o' iate #* dest uction+ it is at the same time to #e filled u' !ith a ce tain #eing$ And this #eing is gi"en as a s*nthesis of tem'e atu e& densit*& and fla"o ' o'e $ In a !o d this s*nthesis signifies a ce tain #eing+ and !hen !e eat& !e do not limit ou sel"es to kno!ing ce tain (ualities of this #eing th ough taste+ #* tasting them !e a'' o' iate them$ Taste is assimilation+ #* the "e * act of #iting the tooth e"eals the densit* of a #od* !hich it is t ansfo ming into gast ic contents$ Thus the s*nthetic intuition of food is in itself an assimilati"e dest uction$ It e"eals to me the #eing !hich I am going to make m* flesh$ Hencefo th& !hat I acce't o !hat I e.ect !ith disgust is the "e * #eing of that existent& o if *ou ' efe & the totalit* of the food ' o'oses to me a ce tain mode of #eing of the #eing !hich I acce't o efuse$ This totalit* is o gani:ed as a fo m in !hich less intense (ualities of densit* and of tem'e atu e a e effaced #ehind the fla"o ' o'e !hich ex' esses them$ The suga *& fo exam'le& ex' esses the slim* !hen !e eat a s'oonful of hone* o molasses& .ust as an anal*tical function ex' esses a geomet ic cu "e$ This means that all (ualities !hich a e not st ictl* s'eaking fla"o #ut !hich a e massed& melted& #u ied in the fla"o & e' esent the matte of the fla"o $ FThe 'iece of chocolate !hich at fi st offe s a esistance to m* tooth& soon a# u'tl* gi"es !a* and c um#les+ its esistance fi st& then its c um#ling is chocolate$G In addition the* a e united to ce tain tem'o al cha acte istics of fla"o + that is& to its mode of tem'o al i:ation$ ,e tain tastes gi"e themsel"es all at once& some a e like dela*ed3action fuses& some elease themsel"es #* deg ees& ce tain ones d!indle slo!l* until the* disa''ea & and still othe s "anish at the "e * moment one thinks to 'ossess them$ These (ualities

a e o gani:ed along !ith densit* and tem'e atu e+ in addition on anothe le"el the* ex' ess the "isual as'ect of the food$ If I eat a 'ink cake& the taste of it is 'ink+ the light suga * 'e fume& the oiliness of the #utte c eam a e the 'ink$ Thus I eat the 'ink as I see the suga *$ )e conclude that fla"o & due to this fact& has a com'lex a chitectu e and diffe entiated matte + it is this st uctu ed matte 33!hich e' esents fo us a 'a ticula t*'e of #eing33that !e can assimilate o e.ect !ith nausea& acco ding to ou o iginal ' o.ect$ It is not a matte of indiffe ence !hethe !e like o*ste s o clams& snails o sh im'& if onl* !e kno! ho! to un a"el the existential significance of these foods$ /ene all* s'eaking the e is no i educi#le taste o inclination$ The* all e' esent a ce tain a'' o' iati"e choice of #eing$ It is u' to existential 's*choanal*sis to com'a e and classif* them$ Ontolog* a#andons us he e+ it has me el* ena#led us to dete mine the ultimate ends of human ealit*& its fundamental 'ossi#ilities& and the "alue !hich haunts it$ Each human ealit* is at the same time a di ect ' o.ect to metamo 'hose its o!n %o 3itself into an In3itself3%o 3itself and a ' o.ect of the a'' o' iation of the !o ld as a totalit* of #eing3in3itself& in the fo m of a fundamental (ualit*$ E"e * human ealit* is a 'assion in that it ' o.ects losing itself so as to found #eing and #* the same st oke to constitute the In3itself !hich esca'es contingenc* #* #eing its o!n foundation& the Ens causa sui& !hich eligions call /od$ Thus the 'assion of man is the e"e se of that of ,h ist& fo man loses himself as man in o de that /od ma* #e #o n$ -ut the idea of /od is cont adicto * and !e lose ou sel"es in "ain$ Man is a useless 'assion$ ETHI,AL IM@LI,ATIONS Ontolog* itself can not fo mulate ethical ' ece'ts$ It is conce ned solel* !ith !hat is& and !e can not 'ossi#l* de i"e im'e ati"es f om ontolog*0s indicati"es$ It does& ho!e"e & allo! us to catch a glim'se of !hat so t of ethics !ill assume its es'onsi#ilities !hen conf onted !ith a human ealit* in situation$ Ontolog* has e"ealed to us& in fact& the o igin and the natu e of "alue+ !e ha"e seen that "alue is the lack in elation to !hich the fo 3itself dete mines its #eing as a lack$ -* the "e * fact that the fo 3itself exists& as !e ha"e seen& "alue a ises to haunt its #eing3fo 3itself$ It follo!s that the "a ious tasks of the fo 3itself can #e made the o#.ect of an existential 's*choanal*sis& fo the* all aim at ' oducing the missing s*nthesis of consciousness and #eing in the fo m of "alue o self3cause$ Thus existential 's*choanal*sis is mo al desc i'tion& fo it eleases to us the ethical meaning of "a ious human ' o.ects$ It indicates to us the necessit* of a#andoning the 's*cholog* of inte est along !ith an* utilita ian inte ' etation of human conduct33#* e"ealing to us the ideal meaning of all human attitudes$ These meanings a e #e*ond egoism and alt uism& #e*ond also an* #eha"io !hich is called disinte ested$ Man makes himself man in o de to #e /od& and selfness conside ed f om this 'oint of "ie! can a''ea to #e an egoism+ #ut ' ecisel* #ecause the e is no common measu e #et!een human ealit* and the self3cause !hich it !ants to #e& one could .ust as !ell sa* that man loses himself in o de that the self3cause ma* exist$ )e !ill conside then that all human existence is a 'assion& the famous self3inte est #eing onl* one !a* f eel* chosen among othe s to eali:e this 'assion$ -ut the ' inci'al esult of existential 's*choanal*sis must #e to make us e'udiate the s'i it of se iousness$ The s'i it of se iousness has t!o cha acte istics6 it conside s "alues as t anscendent gi"ens inde'endent of human su#.ecti"it*& and it t ansfe s the (ualit* of 1desi a#le1 f om the ontological st uctu e of things to thei sim'le mate ial constitution$ %o the s'i it of se iousness& fo exam'le& # ead is desi a#le #ecause it is necessa * to li"e Fa "alue ! itten in an intelligi#le hea"enG and #ecause # ead is nou ishing$ The esult of the se ious attitude& !hich as !e kno! ules the !o ld& is to cause the s*m#olic "alues of things to #e d unk in #* thei em'i ical idios*nc as* as ink #* a #lotte + it 'uts fo !a d the o'acit* of the desi ed o#.ect and 'osits it in itself as a desi a#le i educi#le$ Thus !e a e al ead* on the mo al 'lane #ut concu entl* on that of #ad faith& fo it is an ethics !hich is ashamed of itself and does not da e s'eak its name$ It has o#scu ed all its goals in o de to f ee itself f om anguish$ Man 'u sues #eing #lindl* #* hiding f om himself the f ee ' o.ect !hich is this 'u suit$ He makes himself such that he is !aited fo #* all the tasks 'laced along his !a*$ O#.ects a e mute demands& and he is nothing in himself #ut the 'assi"e o#edience to these demands$ Existential 's*choanal*sis is going to e"eal to man the eal goal of his 'u suit& !hich is #eing as a s*nthetic fusion of the in3itself !ith the fo 3itself+ existential 's*choanal*sis is going to ac(uaint man !ith his 'assion$ In t uth the e a e man* men !ho ha"e ' acticed this 's*choanal*sis on themsel"es and !ho ha"e not !aited to lea n its ' inci'les in o de to make use of them as a means of deli"e ance and sal"ation$ Man* men& in fact& kno! that the goal of thei 'u suit is #eing+ and to the extent that the* 'ossess this kno!ledge& the* ef ain f om a'' o' iating things fo thei o!n sake and t * to eali:e the s*m#olic a'' o' iation of thei #eing3in3itself$ -ut to the extent that this attem't still sha es in the s'i it of se iousness and that these men can still #elie"e that thei mission of effecting the existence of the in3itself3fo 3itself is ! itten in things& the* a e condemned to des'ai + fo the* disco"e at the same time that all human acti"ities a e e(ui"alent Ffo the* all tend to sac ifice man in o de that the self3cause ma* a iseG and that all a e on ' inci'le doomed to failu e$ Thus it amounts to the same thing !hethe one gets d unk alone o is a leade of nations$ If one of these acti"ities takes ' ecedence o"e the othe & this !ill not #e #ecause of its eal goal #ut #ecause of the deg ee of consciousness !hich it 'ossesses of its ideal goal+ and in this case it !ill #e the (uietism of the solita * d unka d !hich !ill take ' ecedence o"e the "ain agitation of the leade of nations$ -ut ontolog* and existential 's*choanal*sis Fo the s'ontaneous and em'i ical a''lication !hich men ha"e al!a*s made of these disci'linesG must e"eal to the mo al agent that he is the #eing #* !hom "alues exist$ It is then that his f eedom !ill #ecome conscious of itself and !ill e"eal itself in anguish as the uni(ue sou ce of "alue and the nothingness #* !hich the !o ld exists$ As soon as f eedom disco"e s the (uest fo #eing and the a'' o' iation of the in3itself as its o!n 'ossi#les& it !ill a'' ehend #* and in anguish that the* a e 'ossi#les onl* on the g ound of the 'ossi#ilit* of othe

'ossi#les$ -ut hithe to although 'ossi#les could #e chosen and e.ected ad li#itum& the theme !hich made the unit* of all choices of 'ossi#les !as the "alue o the ideal ' esence of the ens causa sui$ )hat !ill #ecome of f eedom if it tu ns its #ack u'on this "alue5 )ill f eedom ca * this "alue along !ith it !hate"e it does and e"en in its "e * tu ning #ack u'on this "alue5 )ill f eedom ca * this "alue along !ith it !hate"e it does and e"en in its "e * tu ning #ack u'on the in3 itself3fo 3itself5 )ill f eedom #e ea'' ehended f om #ehind #* the "alue !hich it !ishes to contem'late5 O !ill f eedom #* the "e * fact that it a'' ehends itself as a f eedom in elation to itself& #e a#le to 'ut an end to the eign of this "alue5 In 'a ticula is it 'ossi#le fo f eedom to take itself fo a "alue as the sou ce of all "alue& o must it necessa il* #e defined in elation to a t anscendent "alue !hich haunts it5 And in case it could !ill itself as its o!n 'ossi#le and its dete mining "alue& !hat !ould this mean5 A f eedom !hich !ills itself f eedom is in fact a #eing3!hich3is3not!hat3it3is and !hich3is3 !hat3it3is3not& and !hich chooses as the ideal of #eing& #eing3!hat3it3isnot and not3#eing3!hat3it3is$ This f eedom chooses then not to eco"e itself #ut to flee itself& not to coincide !ith itself #ut to #e al!a*s at a distance f om itself$ )hat a e !e to unde stand #* this #eing !hich !ills to hold itself in a!e& to #e at a distance f om itself5 Is it a (uestion of #ad faith o of anothe fundamental attitude5 And can one li"e this ne! as'ect of #eing5 In 'a ticula !ill f eedom #* taking itself fo an end esca'e all situation5 O on the cont a *& !ill it emain situated5 O !ill it situate itself so much the mo e ' ecisel* and the mo e indi"iduall* as it ' o.ects itself fu the in anguish as a conditioned f eedom and acce'ts mo e full* its es'onsi#ilit* as an existent #* !hom the !o ld comes into #eing$ All these (uestions& !hich efe us to a 'u e and not an accesso * eflection& can find thei e'l* onl* on the ethical 'lane$ )e shall de"ote to them a futu e !o k$